Hundreds of federal employees signed an open letter calling on the president to "urgently demand a ceasefire" and the de-escalation of the conflict through the release of hostages and provision of humanitarian aid.
I’m curious, why do you think he actually wants it to continue? Geopolitical strategy is an ugly and complicated beast but most people seem to think it’s as simple as “old man wants genocide”.
His argument is a simplification, yes, of course it’s not as simple as “old man wants genocide”. It’s more like “old man doenst really mind genocide thst much as long as he gets to keep the influence over a proxy state and also his own home state”
I’ve heard about oil off the coast of Gaza. I’ve heard some stories about a canal.
My personal theory:
Saudi Arabia and Israel were just about to normalize relations. Iran didn’t like that, and pushed Hamas to attack in Oct. Meanwhile, there’s some oil depletion stuff happening worldwide except USA and Canada. If the middle east got itself together it could be a global power to rival the US or China. This kind of destabilizing war does a lot to stop that from happening.
Interesting thought, though wasn’t it revealed the plan for the attack started a few years ago? That might weaken the normalized relations aspect but it still could be something they saw coming maybe.
I wasn’t aware, but I don’t think that changes anything.
The US has plans for an invasion of Canada. Doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen anytime soon
He can veto the legislation, and (more contentiously) he can issue executive orders blocking the implementation of the legislation. Or least of all, use his human mouth to speak words against the legislation (the “bully pulpit”).
So he should veto legislation he hasn’t gotten, write an executive understanding order, which again can not set new conditions, or speak against aid to an ally. Doesn’t seem to be cease fire material to me.
write an executive understanding order, which again can not set new conditions,
He is bound by existing conditions, e.g. the ratification of the Geneva Convention, not to facilitate genocide. He is currently being sued for this.
edit: To be sure, the reason I wrote this is contentious, the actual scope of EOs (not to be confused with a private MOU, which isn’t applicable nor legally binding) is contentious. The reason we have the executive branch to begin with, in terms of checks and balances, is to ensure there can be a refusal to implement. Although it’s a non-issue in this case since he’s asking for it, it would only become an issue with a 2/3 majority ready to force legislation through and with him actually opposed to it. Disclaimer, not a lawyer, just know some fundamentals.
I don’t think one state runs the other. IMO, the same organization runs both, plus other European colonial powers and proxy/puppet states. It’s basically impossible otherwise to account for this kind of like, inexplicable synchronicity that they have with absolutely indefensible policies.
Israel is a proxy state. A ridiculous amount of Israeli GDP is actually American aid.
If Biden wanted the bombing the to stop, it would stop.
I’m curious, why do you think he actually wants it to continue? Geopolitical strategy is an ugly and complicated beast but most people seem to think it’s as simple as “old man wants genocide”.
His argument is a simplification, yes, of course it’s not as simple as “old man wants genocide”. It’s more like “old man doenst really mind genocide thst much as long as he gets to keep the influence over a proxy state and also his own home state”
That’s fair, thanks for expanding. Now I ask, do you think any other US president would do the same in his shoes? Why or why not?
I’ve heard about oil off the coast of Gaza. I’ve heard some stories about a canal.
My personal theory:
Saudi Arabia and Israel were just about to normalize relations. Iran didn’t like that, and pushed Hamas to attack in Oct. Meanwhile, there’s some oil depletion stuff happening worldwide except USA and Canada. If the middle east got itself together it could be a global power to rival the US or China. This kind of destabilizing war does a lot to stop that from happening.
I don’t think it’s any one thing though.
Interesting thought, though wasn’t it revealed the plan for the attack started a few years ago? That might weaken the normalized relations aspect but it still could be something they saw coming maybe.
I wasn’t aware, but I don’t think that changes anything.
The US has plans for an invasion of Canada. Doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen anytime soon
Biden was falling asleep during the presidential debates. He’s a senile old man and obvious figurehead who’s just doing as he’s told IMHO
That makes no sense. Congress legislates and the executive executes that legislation. The President can’t put further requirements on aid.
He can veto the legislation, and (more contentiously) he can issue executive orders blocking the implementation of the legislation. Or least of all, use his human mouth to speak words against the legislation (the “bully pulpit”).
So he should veto legislation he hasn’t gotten, write an executive understanding order, which again can not set new conditions, or speak against aid to an ally. Doesn’t seem to be cease fire material to me.
“He hasn’t gotten”? He drafted the request:
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-drafts-100-billion-foreign-aid-package-including/story?id=104059871
He is bound by existing conditions, e.g. the ratification of the Geneva Convention, not to facilitate genocide. He is currently being sued for this.
edit: To be sure, the reason I wrote this is contentious, the actual scope of EOs (not to be confused with a private MOU, which isn’t applicable nor legally binding) is contentious. The reason we have the executive branch to begin with, in terms of checks and balances, is to ensure there can be a refusal to implement. Although it’s a non-issue in this case since he’s asking for it, it would only become an issue with a 2/3 majority ready to force legislation through and with him actually opposed to it. Disclaimer, not a lawyer, just know some fundamentals.
The legislation is not on the desk, you know that but are being obtuse
Has the International Criminal Court charged anyone on genocide? The President is bound by the legislation in front of them, not your feelings.
I will never understand how people have the nerve to leave comments about things they don’t understand or know anything about.
Really? That’s the best you can do?
I don’t think one state runs the other. IMO, the same organization runs both, plus other European colonial powers and proxy/puppet states. It’s basically impossible otherwise to account for this kind of like, inexplicable synchronicity that they have with absolutely indefensible policies.
Yeah I hate to feed into conspiracy theories but there’s absolutely a freemason shadow government or something deeper going on internationally.
Truth is the truth. Doesn’t take much imagination to see why that type of idea is stigmatized so much.
The USA is Israel’s proxy