cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/20919616
Senior White House figures privately told Israel that the U.S. would support its decision to ramp up military pressure against Hezbollah — even as the Biden administration publicly urged the Israeli government in recent weeks to curtail its strikes, according to American and Israeli officials.
Not everyone in the administration was on board with Israel’s shift, despite support inside the White House, the officials said. The decision to focus on Hezbollah sparked division within the U.S. government, drawing opposition from people inside the Pentagon, State Department and intelligence community who believed Israel’s move against the Iran-backed militia could drag American forces into yet another Middle East conflict.
Officials in the intelligence community, in briefings and talks with members of Congress last week, had said they were increasingly worried about the potential for a direct ground confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah. Similar conversations were occurring in the State Department, where officials were concerned about the mounting civilian death toll in Lebanon.
The internal administration division seems to have dissipated somewhat in recent days, with top U.S. officials convening Monday at the White House with President Joe Biden to discuss the situation on the ground. Most agreed that the conflict, while fragile, could offer an opportunity to reduce Iran’s influence in Lebanon and the region.
Still, the White House is walking a fine line, U.S. and Israeli officials said. The Biden administration wants to support Israel’s actions against a U.S.-designated terrorist group that has killed Americans and threatens the region. But it is not comfortable endorsing Israel’s campaign completely — or publicly — because it is worried it will creep too far into Lebanese territory, instigating an all-out war, one of the U.S. officials said.
You're hardly speaking, you're just saying I'm evil for offering up a terrible yet balanced solution.
And if you're not going to read my arguments I can tell you don't actually have anything to gain or lose in this conversation, you're merely here to stroke fire.
Maybe that's what I'm doin? Maybe I'm trying to infuriate you? Or maybe I'm trying to get your mind to stop being so emotional about this and realize that feelings are going to get in the way the whole time. Deescalating any of this requires calm.
And my solution would certainly calm things down there. Maybe not from Iranian allies or Israel allies, but in the area they would be.
what is this Thanos-ass argument you're trying to legitimize by your persistence? No one takes it seriously and you're unwell for suggesting it. I'm glad you're nobody.
Trying to legitimize? I want you to come up with a better solution that involves less death since that seems to have set you off.
The personal attacks are a bit odd. Unwell and a nobody?
If that were truly the case, I assume you wouldn't have continued this conversation. You see some benefit in continuing to engage.
Or, you have a personal policy to always have the last say. Which means we could go on forever, and personally, that might be fun to try.
To be fair your solution has to be among the top for most deaths, at least in the short term. And you can only justify it by precluding any long term solution thats less violent. I just don't agree with the assumption everything less violent has been tried and failed. Its a lack of creativity maybe, or you've lost faith that most people have positive motivations.
There has been a distinct historical lack of potential solutions being tried. Because of that we have the modern day shit show where no one is willing to try to come up with potential solutions.
The first and most vital component is to remove Netanyahou and zionists from power. Only Israel can do that. (Through non violent means).
Without that all the evidence shows that violence will contribute.
The reason nothing works is because to negotiate with someone you have to have something they want. Israel doesnt want anything, and won't negotiate.
Normally when diplomacy fails to this degree, violence is the only remaining solution, but then the western nations supporting israel, help them fight off any attack and then punish any nation who dared to try.
So even the last step of violence fails. The west needs to fuck off from Israel and let them fight their own wars. They wouldnt swing their dick around the way they do without America's wallet in their pocket. That's fuck you kind of money.
I don't disagree with that. I learned about this conflict in like 2012-2013. Never heard of it being a problem first.
$3b/year at the time in arms to Israel, and the U.S. received nothing. Well I thought so at the time. The problem is that some big intelligence assets are there - ballistic missile detection and interception systems. The US essentially is using Israel as an area to guard international anti-nuclear weapon facilities in one of the already fairly unstable regions in the world.
The US faces a choice. Stop sending the arms and risk losing that technology, or continue to send them and risk Israel belligerently killing its neighbors.
Given that the Eastern part of the world still holds hostility towards the West simply because we have a view that people are allowed to dissent from their governments and that they are presumably nuclear armed, the US will never let that technology go, unless it is replaced with something better.
We already have military bases in a bunch of middle east countries. Its harder to find a country there that wont facilitate the US military. Saudi Arabia is one of Americas strongest partners there as well.
The reason america keeps supporting israel is because when politicians go against AIPAC they usually pay for it with their political seats. They punish anyone who tries to go against them. They recently forced out Corey Bush for example.
Its getting very close to the point where supporting israel will actually lose you your seat as well, so there will be a tipping point where politicians aren't afraid of AIPAC anymore.