It’s possible, just possible, that Trump decided he wants credit as a peacemaker. We’ve said for a year that all Biden needs to do is cut Israel off from weapons. If that’s what Trump went with then it’s entirely possible.
Because it certainly isn’t Biden’s doing. He’s done nothing but write sternly worded letters and repeat debunked IDF propaganda.
It’s possible, just possible, that Trump decided he wants credit as a peacemaker.
No it isn’t.
We’ve said for a year that all Biden needs to do is cut Israel off from weapons.
All the US government needs to do is cut Israel off from weapons.
Biden certainly didn’t hesitate to send them anything they needed, but also, the idea that he could have just decided that he wasn’t sending the congressionally mandated aid, and it would have worked, and he and the Democrats would have suffered no consequences at all either electoral or geopolitical, is a fantasy.
I agree that he shouldn’t have done what he did. But the idea that it would have been easy to cut off aid or make a credible threat to do so is pure fantasy.
There’s actually a really good lesson here: That’s exactly what Trump tried to do with Ukraine’s military aid, and it didn’t work, because that’s not how it works. He held up the aid, people found out, and he got forced to send the aid anyway, because it’s not his decision alone.
Congress would have had to repeal the Leahy Law to get aid going to Israel again. It was absolutely possible and with a proper investigation and airing of the facts Democrats would have backed him. It would be impossible not to. Instead he covered for Israel at every turn, even shutting down government experts trying to raise red flags.
So it would have been super easy, all he would have had to do would be bring the American people, including the Democrats in congress led by Nancy Pelosi, to grasp and agree to the idea that they’ve been abetting monstrous war crimes this entire time, and need to stop, even if the result is not only a reckoning with what US military aid is really enabling, but also the possibility that Israel might get overrun by massive enemies it is completely surrounded by which would, more or less, crush it like a bug without our formidable assistance in terms of military aid and deterrance.
Sounds great. I do actually agree with you that he should have done that. The idea that it would have been super easy I am less convinced by.
but also the possibility that Israel might get overrun by massive enemies it is completely surrounded by which would, more or less, crush it like a bug without our formidable assistance in terms of military aid and deterrance.
While that is a view that has been cultivated by Israel, and would have to be combatted in the electorate and elected officials of the US in case of policy change, it’s not realistic. Considering its primary foes in past conflicts, Egypt and Jordan, are US-aligned and cold-but-cooperative towards Israel; and Syria, which is… not currently in any position to offer serious hostility. The Saudis have no serious interest in destroying Israel, and while Iraq is subverted enough by Iran that, if push came to shove, it might allow Iranian forces to cross, it’s unlikely to take a serious interest in the matter itself. And I don’t think even the clerical fascists of Iran are crazy enough to think they have that kind of long-distance force-projection capability for a serious and sustained war - especially not when the Saudis would love any excuse to fuck with them, whatever claims of detente have been recently.
I don’t think even the clerical fascists of Iran are crazy enough to think they have that kind of long-distance force-projection capability for a serious and sustained war
The former government of Yemen has its hand up. Yes? Something to share with the class?
Israel is 8,500 square miles big. That’s it. There are cities in China that are bigger than Israel.
I mostly agree with the rest of your assessment, although I would argue that a lot of that reluctance to attack Israel from the US-aligned states in the region could change dramatically if the US started making noises about how we weren’t on Team Israel anymore. Some leader might get stars in their eyes about how they could get written into the history of the Middle East forever, and not have to deal with any American aircraft carriers coming around and making him regret it. But assuming that Iran wouldn’t take the opportunity to fuck up Israel with quite a bit of cooperation and safe passage from somebody in the area seems crazy to me.
Iran is 636,000 square miles big. Size isn’t always the determining factor, but they’re also not a weak regional power or shy about picking fights with dangerous opponents.
Again: I think we should have threatened Israel with this type of outcome, if they don’t stop committing a stain on the soul of the world. I’m just saying it is not a small consequence to start tossing around, for someone who works in a building where Israel is for some godforsaken reason regarded as the good guys. Also, Trump seems to love Israel and strongly dislike all arabs, so it’s weird to me that there’s this kind of propaganda realignment that says he’s invested in stopping Israel from what they’re doing. I think he wants to accelerate it, and I think that’s going to be the result.
To be clear, you don’t believe that Trump, the guy famous for being easy to manipulate by stroking his ego, would be influenced by grandiose titles like “peacemaker”?
I think he would be extremely flattered by the title of peacemaker, just as he would be flattered by the idea that he is the least racist person you’ll ever meet, a great husband, skilled at business, or kind and generous. I think the idea of actually taking steps to be any of those things is abhorrent to him. In particular, the idea of doing unpopular (anti-Israel) things to save the lives of a bunch of Arab terrorists, I think is so laughably incompatible with Trump that it’s very weird that people here and at The Guardian are saying it with a straight face.
People are also saying with a straight face that all anybody had to do was call up Israel and tell them firmly to stop, and that would fix it. I think they’re only saying that so they can imply that Biden is bad because he refused to do that. It’s an absurd thing to say.
So no, you’re saying he can’t be influenced through this kind of flattery. I think you’re giving him too much credit. This guy flip-flopped on a Tik Tok ban just because he started getting followers. He’ll flip on anything if he thinks it will make him popular.
Speaking of popularity, pro-Palestinian viewpoints are extremely popular amongst US youth. I don’t agree with you that this is the unpopular viewpoint. Many news outlets are even claiming a Tik Tok ban is being used to silence majority pro-Palestinian opinions. Like others here, I think it’s crazy to believe he won’t be influenced through this kind of coverage. Furthermore, it would be a shame if Trump’s fragile ego wasn’t taken advantage of in this instance to help bring an end to the genocide. Unfortunately, it seems like some people would rather have the killing continue than manipulate Trump through the mere suggestion that he can bring peace.
Furthermore, it would be a shame if Trump’s fragile ego wasn’t taken advantage of in this instance to help bring an end to the genocide. Unfortunately, it seems like some people would rather have the killing continue than manipulate Trump through the mere suggestion that he can bring peace.
What kind of homeopathic Jedi mind trick is this? I don’t want the killing to continue. That’s why I didn’t want Trump, and why I am attempting to talk sense into people who for some asinine reason are celebrating what a good job he’s going to do of stopping it. I cannot believe that on a supposedly technie / leftist social media platform I am having to explain to people that Trump isn’t a caring or capable individual when they are swearing he’s accomplished a great success for human rights before even coming into office. I cannot fathom what would make any intelligent person, at this point and watching his track record so far, think that.
How popular do you think pro-Palestinian viewpoints are among the news Trump watches, or any of the people he talks to? The people influencing him, I think, mostly think all the Palestinians should die and the faster the better. That’s not going to change because of a story in The Guardian, or The Wall Street Journal, or on Fox News. For one thing, even if he somehow were spurred to action, it would require actual toughness and cleverness in dealing with Netanyahu, which Trump doesn’t have.
It’s absolutely true that Trump can be manipulated to do various things almost without limit, by people flattering him. The degree to which he cares about what pro-Palestinian youth in the United States think has nothing to do with whether they think he’s doing a good job being a peacemaker. It is limited to whether they are going to make a problem which warrants him deploying the National Guard against them with live ammunition.
It’s not a Jedi mind trick to suggest that if Trump can be easily manipulated, those who care should try to influence him towards good. It doesn’t matter if “being good” is Trump’s desire or not. I absolutely agree with Maggoty that Trump would love being credited as a peacemaker, and I think his ego can drive him to want to fulfill that role.
That’s why I didn’t want Trump, and why I am attempting to talk sense into people…
That’s neat, but professing how much you didn’t and still don’t want him isn’t going to do anyone any good at this point. Trump is going to be sworn in next week regardless. Articles like this one from The Guardian are significantly more helpful at influencing a better path forward than constant doomerism. I would absolutely love it if Trump can find any success in the peacemaking process.
I thought about posting “We need to see more fake good stories about Trump in the press. He’ll see them, and start doing good things, and if you don’t agree, you would rather have him do bad thing and you’re bad” to meanwhileongrad or a new post on this community, but I decided it’s not really worth the bandwidth. The two of you are out of your minds.
I’m not sure how your theoretical post serves any purpose beside setting up a strawman. This hasn’t been about inventing fake stories, but instead, about dangling a very real carrot in front of the new US president.
It’s possible, just possible, that Trump decided he wants credit as a peacemaker. We’ve said for a year that all Biden needs to do is cut Israel off from weapons. If that’s what Trump went with then it’s entirely possible.
Because it certainly isn’t Biden’s doing. He’s done nothing but write sternly worded letters and repeat debunked IDF propaganda.
No it isn’t.
All the US government needs to do is cut Israel off from weapons.
Biden certainly didn’t hesitate to send them anything they needed, but also, the idea that he could have just decided that he wasn’t sending the congressionally mandated aid, and it would have worked, and he and the Democrats would have suffered no consequences at all either electoral or geopolitical, is a fantasy.
I agree that he shouldn’t have done what he did. But the idea that it would have been easy to cut off aid or make a credible threat to do so is pure fantasy.
There’s actually a really good lesson here: That’s exactly what Trump tried to do with Ukraine’s military aid, and it didn’t work, because that’s not how it works. He held up the aid, people found out, and he got forced to send the aid anyway, because it’s not his decision alone.
Congress would have had to repeal the Leahy Law to get aid going to Israel again. It was absolutely possible and with a proper investigation and airing of the facts Democrats would have backed him. It would be impossible not to. Instead he covered for Israel at every turn, even shutting down government experts trying to raise red flags.
So it would have been super easy, all he would have had to do would be bring the American people, including the Democrats in congress led by Nancy Pelosi, to grasp and agree to the idea that they’ve been abetting monstrous war crimes this entire time, and need to stop, even if the result is not only a reckoning with what US military aid is really enabling, but also the possibility that Israel might get overrun by massive enemies it is completely surrounded by which would, more or less, crush it like a bug without our formidable assistance in terms of military aid and deterrance.
Sounds great. I do actually agree with you that he should have done that. The idea that it would have been super easy I am less convinced by.
While that is a view that has been cultivated by Israel, and would have to be combatted in the electorate and elected officials of the US in case of policy change, it’s not realistic. Considering its primary foes in past conflicts, Egypt and Jordan, are US-aligned and cold-but-cooperative towards Israel; and Syria, which is… not currently in any position to offer serious hostility. The Saudis have no serious interest in destroying Israel, and while Iraq is subverted enough by Iran that, if push came to shove, it might allow Iranian forces to cross, it’s unlikely to take a serious interest in the matter itself. And I don’t think even the clerical fascists of Iran are crazy enough to think they have that kind of long-distance force-projection capability for a serious and sustained war - especially not when the Saudis would love any excuse to fuck with them, whatever claims of detente have been recently.
The former government of Yemen has its hand up. Yes? Something to share with the class?
Israel is 8,500 square miles big. That’s it. There are cities in China that are bigger than Israel.
I mostly agree with the rest of your assessment, although I would argue that a lot of that reluctance to attack Israel from the US-aligned states in the region could change dramatically if the US started making noises about how we weren’t on Team Israel anymore. Some leader might get stars in their eyes about how they could get written into the history of the Middle East forever, and not have to deal with any American aircraft carriers coming around and making him regret it. But assuming that Iran wouldn’t take the opportunity to fuck up Israel with quite a bit of cooperation and safe passage from somebody in the area seems crazy to me.
Iran is 636,000 square miles big. Size isn’t always the determining factor, but they’re also not a weak regional power or shy about picking fights with dangerous opponents.
Again: I think we should have threatened Israel with this type of outcome, if they don’t stop committing a stain on the soul of the world. I’m just saying it is not a small consequence to start tossing around, for someone who works in a building where Israel is for some godforsaken reason regarded as the good guys. Also, Trump seems to love Israel and strongly dislike all arabs, so it’s weird to me that there’s this kind of propaganda realignment that says he’s invested in stopping Israel from what they’re doing. I think he wants to accelerate it, and I think that’s going to be the result.
To be clear, you don’t believe that Trump, the guy famous for being easy to manipulate by stroking his ego, would be influenced by grandiose titles like “peacemaker”?
I think he would be extremely flattered by the title of peacemaker, just as he would be flattered by the idea that he is the least racist person you’ll ever meet, a great husband, skilled at business, or kind and generous. I think the idea of actually taking steps to be any of those things is abhorrent to him. In particular, the idea of doing unpopular (anti-Israel) things to save the lives of a bunch of Arab terrorists, I think is so laughably incompatible with Trump that it’s very weird that people here and at The Guardian are saying it with a straight face.
People are also saying with a straight face that all anybody had to do was call up Israel and tell them firmly to stop, and that would fix it. I think they’re only saying that so they can imply that Biden is bad because he refused to do that. It’s an absurd thing to say.
So no, you’re saying he can’t be influenced through this kind of flattery. I think you’re giving him too much credit. This guy flip-flopped on a Tik Tok ban just because he started getting followers. He’ll flip on anything if he thinks it will make him popular.
Speaking of popularity, pro-Palestinian viewpoints are extremely popular amongst US youth. I don’t agree with you that this is the unpopular viewpoint. Many news outlets are even claiming a Tik Tok ban is being used to silence majority pro-Palestinian opinions. Like others here, I think it’s crazy to believe he won’t be influenced through this kind of coverage. Furthermore, it would be a shame if Trump’s fragile ego wasn’t taken advantage of in this instance to help bring an end to the genocide. Unfortunately, it seems like some people would rather have the killing continue than manipulate Trump through the mere suggestion that he can bring peace.
What kind of homeopathic Jedi mind trick is this? I don’t want the killing to continue. That’s why I didn’t want Trump, and why I am attempting to talk sense into people who for some asinine reason are celebrating what a good job he’s going to do of stopping it. I cannot believe that on a supposedly technie / leftist social media platform I am having to explain to people that Trump isn’t a caring or capable individual when they are swearing he’s accomplished a great success for human rights before even coming into office. I cannot fathom what would make any intelligent person, at this point and watching his track record so far, think that.
How popular do you think pro-Palestinian viewpoints are among the news Trump watches, or any of the people he talks to? The people influencing him, I think, mostly think all the Palestinians should die and the faster the better. That’s not going to change because of a story in The Guardian, or The Wall Street Journal, or on Fox News. For one thing, even if he somehow were spurred to action, it would require actual toughness and cleverness in dealing with Netanyahu, which Trump doesn’t have.
It’s absolutely true that Trump can be manipulated to do various things almost without limit, by people flattering him. The degree to which he cares about what pro-Palestinian youth in the United States think has nothing to do with whether they think he’s doing a good job being a peacemaker. It is limited to whether they are going to make a problem which warrants him deploying the National Guard against them with live ammunition.
It’s not a Jedi mind trick to suggest that if Trump can be easily manipulated, those who care should try to influence him towards good. It doesn’t matter if “being good” is Trump’s desire or not. I absolutely agree with Maggoty that Trump would love being credited as a peacemaker, and I think his ego can drive him to want to fulfill that role.
That’s neat, but professing how much you didn’t and still don’t want him isn’t going to do anyone any good at this point. Trump is going to be sworn in next week regardless. Articles like this one from The Guardian are significantly more helpful at influencing a better path forward than constant doomerism. I would absolutely love it if Trump can find any success in the peacemaking process.
I thought about posting “We need to see more fake good stories about Trump in the press. He’ll see them, and start doing good things, and if you don’t agree, you would rather have him do bad thing and you’re bad” to meanwhileongrad or a new post on this community, but I decided it’s not really worth the bandwidth. The two of you are out of your minds.
I’m not sure how your theoretical post serves any purpose beside setting up a strawman. This hasn’t been about inventing fake stories, but instead, about dangling a very real carrot in front of the new US president.