3 ms·
I'm not attacking NATO. I'm saying the U.S is subsidizing Europe's defense in the trillions (if we count since WW2 end). It could be beneficial to the U.S, or n
by montblanc 5y ago
I'm not attacking NATO. I'm saying the U.S is subsidizing Europe's defense in the trillions (if we count since WW2 end). It could be beneficial to the U.S, or not. I'm only saying U.S aid to Israel is not unique and is peanuts compared to the NATO subsidy. People here like saying they are super focused on Israel because of the 3 billion annual subsidy the U.S gives to Israel. I call bullshit on that.
- mullingitover 5y agoThe NATO relationship effectively turns Europe into vassal states - we don't have German or French bases on US soil, only the US gets that out of NATO. So it's a 'subsidy' only in the sense that the US is protecting its property. People get angry about the Israel aid not because of the volume of funding, but because of the human rights/colonialism problems that the US subsidizes. I personally feel that way, but at the same time I understand the realpolitik deal with Israel - I believe the purpose of keeping Israel there is to prevent some version of the Ottoman Empire from re-forming.
- montblanc 5y ago> I believe the purpose of keeping Israel there Here's part of the problem. Does it make sense to you Israel just disappears? Sounds like it from what you're saying. Isn't it weird though - how many nation states do you think should vanish? > but because of the human rights/colonialism problems If Western societies really wanted the conflict to dissolve they wouldn't keep encouraging the Palestinians to "return" to their home (75 years after). Western societies keep the conflict alive. So it makes me think human rights issues isn't really the thing here.