I watched live coverage from Tel Aviv. It was very clear that these missiles got through by sheer numbers. Dozens of interceptions were caught on one feed. Israel probably prioritized intercepting missiles with the most concerning trajectories.
We do. However we have convinced half the population that poor people don't deserve it. Single Payer would cost less than our current system but fuck the poor.
Haven't you thought about the ruling class, who are banking on idiots without critical thinking skills supporting them and the rest being enslaved to job health insurance, so they sit still and don't kick up a fuss?
Good news, you guys spend more per capita in public money on healthcare than pretty much every other country on earth, including all those western democracies with their communist "free" healthcare
This money already comes from the allocated military budget. It's meant for military spending regardless of use. Stopping military aid to Israel doesn't mean that money is suddenly freed up for nonmilitary spending.
Not directly, but if we didn't feel any obligation to funding Israel's defense we wouldnt have to dump that much more money into our defense budget. That would in theory free it up for better uses.
That said even if we weren't funding Israel our political environment ensures that money will almost certainly go to nothing the citizens would benefit from
It's a shame I'm being downvoted because there is a lot of nuance that goes into our national budget that people don't generally understand or care about.
Anyway, I completely understand the sentiment, but I think it's an important distinction that people should be aware of. If you want more nonmilitary spending, you have to advocate for a general decrease in the military budget. Stopping funding to Israel just means the military gets the money back to do other things with.
If we didn't provide support to Ukraine, the outcome would be disastrous for the rest of the region, and probably the world. If we stopped providing support to Israel, a guy goes to jail, and they have to learn diplomacy.
We can agree to disagree but if the current administration had not promised NATO membership to Ukraine, Russia probably wouldn't have invaded. If we allow US weapons to strike at the heart of Russia, we are essentially in a proxy war with Russia, the 2nd most powerful nuclear state on the planet. Is WW3 and global thermonuclear war that wipes out 2/3 of Earth's population worth it? I don't think so. Also consider that we have been lied to by our government in almost every recent engagement... let's not forget the so-called 'WMD's' in Iraq that got thousands of American's killed. This idea that Putin is going to invade NATO and risk nuclear annihilation is comical! But, he will defend Mother Russia if attacked!
To address your points, I have two questions. Is Ukraine a sovereign nation? Are they being invaded by Russia?
Also, just to point out a conflicting issue in your argument. Which is it? Is Russia going to risk nuclear annihilation, or are they not going to risk it? You say they will because we're allowing them to choose their own security arrangements. But, yet, you say Putin risking it on an invasion of a NATO country is comical. So, which is it?
The argument is that Russia wants to reconstitute the old Soviet Union which would include NATO countries like Poland. Attacking a NATO country ensures a war between NATO and Russia. Ukraine is not in NATO. We have no obligation to fight for it - in fact, we could have bought a home for every homeless person in the U.S. and given everyone free college for the money we've sent to Ukraine. My main issue of this topic is what do we, the U.S., want to risk, for this cause? It's no different than a street fight - we will risk everything, including death, to protect our family/friends, but we will apply a risk/reward calculation to determine if we will fight for someone outside of our family/friend circle. It's your absolute right to believe that the 'facts' our Government is giving you are actual 'facts'. It's also my absolute right to believe that our Government's history of past lies drives my reluctance to believe them this time. I'm not some random rube on the Internet. I've worked in the U.S. Senate and supported the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senate Armed Services Committee. We are all being played, left and right, so that money can be shoveled to Defense contractors. Is that what you want your kids and grandkids to fight and die for?
We can agree to disagree but if the current administration had not promised NATO membership to Ukraine, Russia probably wouldn't have invaded.
That is not accurate; the Russian state media prematurely put out a victory article two days into the invasion which made very obvious that concerns over NATO were secondary to irredentism, and that the main problem with NATO is that it prevents Russian irredentism.
Russia is not going to wage a nuclear war over the borders returning to where they were in 2014 - it is a ridiculous proposition. And as for considering itself in a proxy war with the USA - they already declare that they are at war with you - you just don't take them seriously because their conventional forces are no match for America's and you know they won't use nuclear weapons because they aren't suicidal.
726
u/krt941 Oct 01 '24 edited Oct 01 '24
I watched live coverage from Tel Aviv. It was very clear that these missiles got through by sheer numbers. Dozens of interceptions were caught on one feed. Israel probably prioritized intercepting missiles with the most concerning trajectories.