cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/138601

“That son of a bitch, Bibi Netanyahu, he’s a bad guy,” said Biden privately, according to Woodward. “He’s a bad fucking guy!”

Reads like a bloody Onion article.

  • hungprocess@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Since you are a person “with knowledge of how any of it works”, please share with the class what those penalties and repercussions are. Educate us poor ignorant “random Internet citizens”.

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I don’t have knowledge of how it works. And that is why you don’t seem me injecting my bullshit take on how to resolve it. I don’t claim to know how easy it is to just…. Break a decades long agreement.

      I do however listen to the experts when they say that it’s incredibly complicated and detailed situation that goes back decades and involves two countries that have had a conflict since 1948 officially, and predates even that. And that it’s not so simple to just…. Break a decades long agreement.

      See?

      That’s how an understanding of NUANCE works. You start by learning that you don’t know everthing, and finish with the understanding that not everthing is as black and white as you’d like it to be- that there will always be others that know more about it than you do, and that you should listen to them.

      And no, I’m not one of them. I’m simply advocating that you seek them out and listen to what they say. Because I guarantee you, they’re going to school you on what you thought you knew about how to navigate geopolitical diplomacy.

      We can all hope that the powers that be find a way to end this as soon as possible. But we’re not helping anyone by assuming simplicity where there isn’t any.

      • BMTea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Your argument is silly. There are laws on the book that empower the State Department to block arms transfers to Israel. The only way this can be undone is if Congress repealed the laws, which is hardly likely.

        • Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          19
          ·
          3 months ago

          So, what you’re saying is that it’s….

          Complicated?

          • hungprocess@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I think part of why you’re getting downvoted to hell is because your initial comment reads like “I don’t have the answers (none of us do), but I know yours is wrong. I’m not contributing any facts to show why you’re wrong, but because I feel strongly that you are, I’ve decided to be insulting about it.”

            I get it, world politics is complicated. Absolutely no action on a world stage is without unexpected consequences. But that in itself is not an argument for arming an ethnostate we know to be killing civilians at an alarming rate. And the unexpected consequences would have to be damned severe to outweigh the known consequences of our current actions: if we keep providing weapons to Israel, those weapons will be used to kill women and children in droves.

            • Soup@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              No, I’m being downvoted because the majority of lemmy doesn’t understand how nuanced topics work. It’s all or nothing. “With us, or against us.”

              It’s a hive mind mentality here.

              With this in mind, it’s not a stretch to understand that one doesn’t need to know how things should be done to know how things shouldn’t be done.

              Want an example? I don’t know the right way to safely jump out of an airplane is, but I know that doing it without a parachute is fucking stupid.

              And this same logic is applied to the idea that it’s easy to just end treaties and agreements and assume there’d be no consequences. Those that have the power to end them- yeah… THEY know.

              But I know, it’s SOOOOOO much easier to just fill in the blanks with whatever bullshit suits an argument than it is to actually look into it. I’ve looked into it. And as I r already mentioned- EXPERTS in the field have said it’s incredibly complicated

              Lastly, I don’t give a shit about being downvoted. It’s an irrelevant and worthless carryover from Reddit that should never have happened.

              • BMTea@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                This is a nice little rant, but there is nothing “complicated” about the Leahy law or the State Department discretion unless you’re literally a child or have some kind of cognition issue. It’s straight forward. If Biden wants to stop sending weapons, all he has to do is tell his Secretary of State “hey, stop sending weapons on account of the law says we can’t” and it’s done.

                • Soup@lemmy.cafe
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Cool. And in your little make believe world, there’s zero repercussions for doing that?

                  This is EXACTLY my point. You don’t know how it works.