too bad lemmy doesn’t have exclusively good content, like the gold standard set by the rest of the internet.

yea, it’s irritating by way of inconvenience, especially in monocultures like the states, but it isn’t wrong or a “bad” behavior, so go for it.

saying “shalom” or “namastey” or “hola” as a non-native speaker was an irritating “hip” thing to do when that movie came out, and that’s a scene where Peter Parker is trying repeatedly to be “hip” and failing spectacularly.

exactly correct.

I’m explaining the facts clearly with respect to the topic and responding directly to your comments.

that is not hasbara.

If you are having trouble finding sources for certain fundamental facts, tell me what those facts are.

I will provide you with sources.

If you are trying to discredit the facts by consistently avoiding or misrepresenting my argument without any evidence, it’s not going to work.

keep in mind that the point we are addressing is that despite a hypotheticall withdrawal of all US military aid, in no way is Israel unable to continue their invasion/genocide if the US stops supporting Israel altogether.

“- we are funding about 15% of their total military budget”.[in recent years specifically, including the injection of military aid immediately after October 7th]

If the US was to completely stop funding israel, Israel would have zero problem funding their military and their national infrastructure by themselves.

“80%+ of their weapons over the last 70 years come from the US”

It’s convenient for Israel to buy US weapons, and the US should stop selling them weapons, but if the US completely stopped selling arms to israel tomorrow, it in no way cripples or halts the Israeli military from using their stockpile, purchasing arms elsewhere or producing arms themselves.

“- 50 billion in annual trade between US and israel”

less than 10% of Israeli GDP

we should still sanction them, but it isn’t going to make much of a difference in national civilian life or military function.

“Do you think Iran would be so restrained against Israel if US retaliation wasn’t guaranteed?”

no for so many reasons, but tell me your theory.

“The US moved an aircraft carrier into the region following Oct. 7th, do you find that irrelevant too?”

no, but go off, how are aircraft carriers irrelevant?

“US provides diplomatic cover to Israel by vetoing…”

Setting aside the arrest warrants and findings by the ICC, the US should stop vetoing the symbolic adjudications by the UN so everybody can point at Israel and yell “shame”.

this should happen.

however, if the US stops vetoing the symbolic adjudications, Israel is under no obligation to listen to the UN any more than they have listened to or have been following UN regulations since the UN and israel were established, any more than they listen to the ICC.

it would be nice if the US took stronger economic or political action against Israel, or declared further sanctions.

would any of those actions stop netanyahu, the idf or disrupt national function?

Not in any material way.

“You demand that I provide evidence for things that I didn’t say.”

nope.

“That might seem tactically clever, but is it honest?”

I disagree that you making things up and avoiding answering is tactically clever, and it is definitely dishonest.

“I ask for evidence to support things that you did say and you can only repeat your assertions.”

this is also untrue

“Is repetition evidence?”

If you were this confused about basic definitions, I can see why you’re having trouble.

what do you need help with specifically?

which fundamental facts are you having trouble finding sources for?

I don’t think that article is correct.

I’ve never understood subsequent realization to be integral to the dissonance itself, which already exists regardless of one’s awareness of it.

It’s like insisting that you are not depressed unless you “realize” you’re depressed.

unless by “realization” that article simply mean experiencing conflicting emotions, which is the cognitive dissonance itself.

requiring “realization” of a feeling as a prerequisite to that feeling existing doesn’t check out.

if it’s a task I have to do, I literally just make myself physically take the first step no matter how much I don’t want to, because once I’m in media res, inertia kicks in.

There are a ton of October holidays in India, including Diwali, the festival of lights, the biggest holiday in India, so I’m going to travel around the country in October and observe some celebrations!

and hopefully eat like the best fucking food everyday.

Sure thing!

holding two conflicting beliefs at the same time.

like you don’t believe in the death penalty, but you read about a child molester and want them to die.

if you don’t understand the comments or you’re confused, ask for help.

which part don’t you understand or cannot find sources for?

“Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it”.

israel is a technologically advanced independent country with a functioning government, they have an enormous GDP across various industries, and they receive economic and military support from dozens of other countries.

it benefits Israel to receive billions of dollars every year from the US(as it benefits the US) as a historic mutual defense ally, but Israel is in no way entirely dependent on or explicitly beholden to the US.

“If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow.”

how? there is no evidence for this.

The US is a third party to this conflict that, more obviously than ever, has limited diplomatic control over the actions of the current Israeli government and its military.

“The iron dome is funded and built with American hardware”

this is partly correct, as obama matched the billions of dollars israel spent on the iron dome.

“If the US disassembled it…”

the US has no right or obligation to “disassemble” another countries infrastructure any more than Nigeria has the right to disassemble the French metro; this is a non-starter.

“Israel would be unable to act with impunity towards its neighbors…”

this is entirely incorrect as Israel does not require US funding to maintain the iron dome, their military, or their aggression.

The annual GDP of Israel is something like 600 billion now, taking away the 3 billion the US gives them each year isn’t going to make the difference you think it will, even ignoring all of the other countries that fund israel.

a lot of aggregators just throw shit together, but 1440 works pretty hard on making sure their articles are simply reporting significant news from reliable sources.

as far as a collection of news, I get a lot of it from 1440, which compiles current, objective news stories reliably.

I get ideas from the posts here, but I’m pretty careful about checking multiple sources before accepting any of the articles people post here as legitimate information.

none of those sources are at all relevant to the topic: provide evidence for either of these baseless statements:

“Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it”.

this statement is incorrect, as explained above.

“If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow.”

this statement is incorrect, as explained above.

“Israel cannot exist in its current state without the aid and protection the US provides it”.

israel is a technologically advanced independent country with a functioning government, they have an enormous GDP across various industries, and they receive economic and military support from dozens of other countries.

it benefits Israel to receive billions of dollars every year from the US(as it benefits the US) as a historic mutual defense ally, but Israel is in no way entirely dependent on or explicitly beholden to the US.

“If the US actually wanted Israel to stop murdering civilians, it could have it done tomorrow.”

how? there is no evidence for this.

The US is a third party to this conflict that, more obviously than ever, has limited diplomatic control over the actions of the current Israeli government and its military.

Dana, Dana, how could anyone be this right?

amazing.

blech, no it isn’t.

Americans largely do not support this genocide.

The israeli government, most Israeli citizens, and the idf are supporting and continuing a genocide they have perpetrated for decades.

The US is one of many countries that sells weapons to Israel and provides them with aid, continuing over half a century of mutual support.

that does not make the US equally culpable as the Israeli government and military making the decision to continue genocide and defy the UN.

The Israeli government and the IDF are choosing to perpetuate this genocide.

“why isn’t the U.S. stopping Israel, as it surely could simply by pausing the constant flow of weapons?”

One of the reasons is that pausing us weapon shipments would not stop Israel at all.

The US is one of a couple dozen countries regularly supplying Israel with weapons.

Israel has a huge stockpile of weapons, and even if they had zero weapons, one country not selling them weapons would not stop the other two dozen countries selling weapons to them after fifty years or more of providing military support.

another reason is that playing this final card removes any tangible control the us has on the situation politically.

at this point, i personally think a sale of weapons pause is the right idea, but the joint Chiefs of staff highly value Middle Eastern stability that they maintain through strong Israeli military support and are not going to sever ties with their largest and most powerful ally in the Middle East without a reason to (go to the protests).

there are lots of reasons why the US hasn’t paused weapons shipments, but this article isn’t going to supply any real answers because they’re pushing a short-sighted, ill-informed, inaccurate opinion piece rather than critically and realistically analyzing the situation.