4 ms·

Again, trojan horse. Israel is the justification being used. If it wasn't Israel it would be something else. The protest at many of these colleges were organize

Again, trojan horse. Israel is the justification being used. If it wasn't Israel it would be something else. The protest at many of these colleges were organized by Jewish students.

throw310822 2y ago
These methods are typical of authoritarian regimes to crush any protests that threaten the dominant powers. We can easily see that one of the dominant powers in this authoritarian regime is Israel. (Not "the Jews", many of whom took part in the protests- but Israel and its Zionist supporters in the US). And it is so powerful that even in the face of repression and limitations to freedom of speech that clearly go to its advantage, you don't dare to point your finger at it but claim that it's just an excuse for something different.
- 9283409232 2y ago
  > And it is so powerful that even in the face of repression and limitations to freedom of speech that clearly go to its advantage, you don't dare to point your finger at it but claim that it's just an excuse for something different. It is not that this force does not exist. It is that it is means to end, not the end itself.
  - throw310822 2y ago
    > It is that it is means to end, not the end itself. So is giving billions in aids to Israel every year, despite Israel being a rich country (and tens of billions in the last two years alone, and to bomb civilians, no less). So is providing diplomatic cover to Israel in the UN and against institutions such as the International Criminal Court, at the cost of your own moral standing in the world. So is passing laws punishing boycotts of Israel- which the US has done for many years, before Trump. So is absorbing the cost of the instability caused by Israel in the Middle East and intervening in its defence every time they need it. At what point will you start connecting the dots and realise that all these means to some different end always end up benefitting Israel, and no one else?
    - 9283409232 2y ago
      I don't actually believe you are trying to argue in good faith here. > At what point will you start connecting the dots and realise that all these means to some different end always end up benefitting Israel, and no one else? Many US companies and US oligarchs benefit from the actions listed here. You are focused on Israel as if no one in the US is profiting from these actions.
      - throw310822 2y ago
        > Many US companies and US oligarchs benefit from the actions listed here US companies benefit from punishing boycotts of Israel? Benefit from sending it (and not to a different country) billions in aid? Benefit from illegally detaining students that oppose it? Benefit from condemning the ICC? Can you explain a) how; b) who these companies and oligarchs are; c) why always Israel and not any other country or mix of countries?
        9283409232 2y ago
        > Can you explain a) how; b) who these companies and oligarchs are; Most military defense companies. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon are the main ones. Raytheon makes a ton of money from their work on the Iron Dome. 70% of Israel's weaponry comes from these US companies. https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/16/middleeast/where-israel-get-its-weapons/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/16/middleeast/where-israel-get-i... Sending "aid" does not mean sending cold hard cash. Billions in aid could mean sending that equivalent amount in weapons. They are funneling cash into defense contractors. > why always Israel and not any other country or mix of countries? It is not always Israel you just don't look for examples that might prove your world view incorrect. Egypt, South Korea, and smaller middle eastern countries like Jordan receive millions in aid.
        throw310822 2y ago
        The military spending is a contrived explanation. If weapons manufacturers want that money, they can just lobby the government to buy more weapons from them, rather than to gift taxpayers money to another country so that it can buy them. Besides, this would explain just a small fraction of what I mentioned above: what about the punishment of dissent, what about the UN vetoes- does that also hold for Egypt, South Korea or Jordan? And what about the widespread censorship, originating from Israel and enacted by US social media, is that also related to oligarchs and military expenditure? Does Jordan get the same treatment? And maybe the funniest part of this theory is that it tries to explain the disproportionate influence on the US of a foreign country by means of the money that the US is giving it for free. So if the US gave me, say, 4 billions per year (a pittance, really) I would get the privilege of influencing the US' politics more than Israel does today. For free! Come on. Occam would like to have a word with you.

Again, trojan horse. Israel is the justification being used. If it wasn't Israel it would be something else. The protest at many of these colleges were organized by Jewish students.

throw310822 2y ago

These methods are typical of authoritarian regimes to crush any protests that threaten the dominant powers. We can easily see that one of the dominant powers in this authoritarian regime is Israel. (Not "the Jews", many of whom took part in the protests- but Israel and its Zionist supporters in the US). And it is so powerful that even in the face of repression and limitations to freedom of speech that clearly go to its advantage, you don't dare to point your finger at it but claim that it's just an excuse for something different.

9283409232 2y ago
> And it is so powerful that even in the face of repression and limitations to freedom of speech that clearly go to its advantage, you don't dare to point your finger at it but claim that it's just an excuse for something different. It is not that this force does not exist. It is that it is means to end, not the end itself.
- throw310822 2y ago
  > It is that it is means to end, not the end itself. So is giving billions in aids to Israel every year, despite Israel being a rich country (and tens of billions in the last two years alone, and to bomb civilians, no less). So is providing diplomatic cover to Israel in the UN and against institutions such as the International Criminal Court, at the cost of your own moral standing in the world. So is passing laws punishing boycotts of Israel- which the US has done for many years, before Trump. So is absorbing the cost of the instability caused by Israel in the Middle East and intervening in its defence every time they need it. At what point will you start connecting the dots and realise that all these means to some different end always end up benefitting Israel, and no one else?
  - 9283409232 2y ago
    I don't actually believe you are trying to argue in good faith here. > At what point will you start connecting the dots and realise that all these means to some different end always end up benefitting Israel, and no one else? Many US companies and US oligarchs benefit from the actions listed here. You are focused on Israel as if no one in the US is profiting from these actions.
    - throw310822 2y ago
      > Many US companies and US oligarchs benefit from the actions listed here US companies benefit from punishing boycotts of Israel? Benefit from sending it (and not to a different country) billions in aid? Benefit from illegally detaining students that oppose it? Benefit from condemning the ICC? Can you explain a) how; b) who these companies and oligarchs are; c) why always Israel and not any other country or mix of countries?
      - 9283409232 2y ago
        > Can you explain a) how; b) who these companies and oligarchs are; Most military defense companies. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon are the main ones. Raytheon makes a ton of money from their work on the Iron Dome. 70% of Israel's weaponry comes from these US companies. https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/16/middleeast/where-israel-get-its-weapons/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/16/middleeast/where-israel-get-i... Sending "aid" does not mean sending cold hard cash. Billions in aid could mean sending that equivalent amount in weapons. They are funneling cash into defense contractors. > why always Israel and not any other country or mix of countries? It is not always Israel you just don't look for examples that might prove your world view incorrect. Egypt, South Korea, and smaller middle eastern countries like Jordan receive millions in aid.
        throw310822 2y ago
        The military spending is a contrived explanation. If weapons manufacturers want that money, they can just lobby the government to buy more weapons from them, rather than to gift taxpayers money to another country so that it can buy them. Besides, this would explain just a small fraction of what I mentioned above: what about the punishment of dissent, what about the UN vetoes- does that also hold for Egypt, South Korea or Jordan? And what about the widespread censorship, originating from Israel and enacted by US social media, is that also related to oligarchs and military expenditure? Does Jordan get the same treatment? And maybe the funniest part of this theory is that it tries to explain the disproportionate influence on the US of a foreign country by means of the money that the US is giving it for free. So if the US gave me, say, 4 billions per year (a pittance, really) I would get the privilege of influencing the US' politics more than Israel does today. For free! Come on. Occam would like to have a word with you.