4 ms·

Section 219, the US-Israel Military Merger, Would Thwart American Democracy

77 points by slowin 3mo ago

josefritzishere 3mo ago
Section 219 is treason.
- sndgndgndgndy 3mo ago
  Not if you're Israel-First.
  - hightrix 3mo ago
    No elected politician to the American government should be "Israel-first". Anyone stating such should be tried for treason.
apical_dendrite 3mo ago
There's a reason this article doesn't actually quote the text of this provision. The text itself is pretty boilerplate and has nothing to do with a "merger" of the US and Israeli militaries. It basically just tells the Secretary of Defense to appoint someone to coordinate research and development efforts in certain areas. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8800/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8800... The idea that this bill would make the US and Israeli militaries more integrated than the US is with any other allies is just bullshit. We literally have a joint legal and command structure in place for the US to fight alongside NATO allies.
- kittikitti 3mo ago
  After reading through the link you provided, I think it's fair to call it a merger. This is from the opening of Section 219. "... responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation, by-- (1) identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record; (2) ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;" I don't think your counterarguments to the claims from the article are sincere.
  - apical_dendrite 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - sndgndgndgndy 3mo ago
      The IDF/Hasbara has been active on HN for over a decade. Trying to write things off as conspiracy theories doesn't work when the site is under persistent social influence attack by a state actor.
      - apical_dendrite 3mo ago
        To quote the HN guidelines: > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
        sndgndgndgndy 3mo ago
        No, and if you ban me I'll make a new account on a fresh IP. I've seen IDF and Hasbara types posting literal copy-pasted verbatim-identical shill replies from multiple sockpuppet HN accounts, going all the way back to at least 2013. I'm not letting this go.
        apical_dendrite 3mo ago
        @dang you want to weigh in here? Not really sure how you have a productive conversation when one party says that not only will they consider that anyone who disagrees with them is acting on bad faith, but they intend to disregard all rules and circumvent any bans. Anyway it's pretty obvious that talking about this topic is completely pointless so I'm going to quit for now because I'm not actually a sock puppet or a paid shill or whatever, I'm just a human being who has a differing opinion.
        3mo ago
- lorecore 3mo ago
  1. Israel is not an ally, Israel is not in NATO. Most US citizens do not support Israel and want to completely disentangle the US from Israel. Israel has attacked the US on many occasions going so far as to steal nuclear secrets (Jonathan Pollard). 2. The text makes it very clear that this is a merger. A sibling comment posted the exact copy, read it for yourself.
  - apical_dendrite 3mo ago
    This is factually wrong. Israel is a "major non-NATO ally" https://www.state.gov/major-non-nato-ally-status https://www.state.gov/major-non-nato-ally-status Where in the text do you see anything about a "merger"? Bilateral agreements to develop technology are common between countries. That is nothing resembling a merger. There is no discussion of joint command structure, joint budgeting, etc.
    - lorecore 3mo ago
      I speak as a US citizen, not as an Epstein blackmailed politician. Israel is our enemy. To requote the text: > "... responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation, by-- (1) identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record; (2) ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;"
carefulfungi 3mo ago
Future (and current) presidents seem unlikely to be encumbered by laws. They can spend or not spend the budget. They can fire and effectively disable lawful commissions. They are immune from criminal proceedings. They can have any personal financial interests. They can accept large gifts. They can tear down national monuments. Really makes following Congress and laws a lot less informative. ;-)
- notarget137 3mo ago
  And now everybody screams that Putin is bad.
  - bryanlarsen 3mo ago
    False equivalence is what enabled the Trump presidency. "All politicians are corrupt liars, therefore we'll elect the one who tells us the lies we like". Corruption and evil are not binary, they're shades of grey. Trump might be bad, but he's not poisoning his opponents or throwing them out windows. If all politicians are evil, the goal should be to elect the least-evil one.
snootypoot 3mo ago
[flagged]
readthenotes1 3mo ago
Any president that wants to pause it can cite "national security". That sounds pretty reasonable since Israel spies on the USA a lot

77 points by slowin 3mo ago

josefritzishere 3mo ago

Section 219 is treason.

sndgndgndgndy 3mo ago
Not if you're Israel-First.
- hightrix 3mo ago
  No elected politician to the American government should be "Israel-first". Anyone stating such should be tried for treason.

apical_dendrite 3mo ago

There's a reason this article doesn't actually quote the text of this provision. The text itself is pretty boilerplate and has nothing to do with a "merger" of the US and Israeli militaries. It basically just tells the Secretary of Defense to appoint someone to coordinate research and development efforts in certain areas. https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8800/text https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/8800... The idea that this bill would make the US and Israeli militaries more integrated than the US is with any other allies is just bullshit. We literally have a joint legal and command structure in place for the US to fight alongside NATO allies.

kittikitti 3mo ago
After reading through the link you provided, I think it's fair to call it a merger. This is from the opening of Section 219. "... responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation, by-- (1) identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record; (2) ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;" I don't think your counterarguments to the claims from the article are sincere.
- apical_dendrite 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - sndgndgndgndy 3mo ago
    The IDF/Hasbara has been active on HN for over a decade. Trying to write things off as conspiracy theories doesn't work when the site is under persistent social influence attack by a state actor.
    - apical_dendrite 3mo ago
      To quote the HN guidelines: > Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data.
      - sndgndgndgndy 3mo ago
        No, and if you ban me I'll make a new account on a fresh IP. I've seen IDF and Hasbara types posting literal copy-pasted verbatim-identical shill replies from multiple sockpuppet HN accounts, going all the way back to at least 2013. I'm not letting this go.
        apical_dendrite 3mo ago
        @dang you want to weigh in here? Not really sure how you have a productive conversation when one party says that not only will they consider that anyone who disagrees with them is acting on bad faith, but they intend to disregard all rules and circumvent any bans. Anyway it's pretty obvious that talking about this topic is completely pointless so I'm going to quit for now because I'm not actually a sock puppet or a paid shill or whatever, I'm just a human being who has a differing opinion.
        3mo ago
lorecore 3mo ago
1. Israel is not an ally, Israel is not in NATO. Most US citizens do not support Israel and want to completely disentangle the US from Israel. Israel has attacked the US on many occasions going so far as to steal nuclear secrets (Jonathan Pollard). 2. The text makes it very clear that this is a merger. A sibling comment posted the exact copy, read it for yourself.
- apical_dendrite 3mo ago
  This is factually wrong. Israel is a "major non-NATO ally" https://www.state.gov/major-non-nato-ally-status https://www.state.gov/major-non-nato-ally-status Where in the text do you see anything about a "merger"? Bilateral agreements to develop technology are common between countries. That is nothing resembling a merger. There is no discussion of joint command structure, joint budgeting, etc.
  - lorecore 3mo ago
    I speak as a US citizen, not as an Epstein blackmailed politician. Israel is our enemy. To requote the text: > "... responsible for synchronizing cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel, to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation, by-- (1) identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record; (2) ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;"

carefulfungi 3mo ago

Future (and current) presidents seem unlikely to be encumbered by laws. They can spend or not spend the budget. They can fire and effectively disable lawful commissions. They are immune from criminal proceedings. They can have any personal financial interests. They can accept large gifts. They can tear down national monuments. Really makes following Congress and laws a lot less informative. ;-)

notarget137 3mo ago
And now everybody screams that Putin is bad.
- bryanlarsen 3mo ago
  False equivalence is what enabled the Trump presidency. "All politicians are corrupt liars, therefore we'll elect the one who tells us the lies we like". Corruption and evil are not binary, they're shades of grey. Trump might be bad, but he's not poisoning his opponents or throwing them out windows. If all politicians are evil, the goal should be to elect the least-evil one.

snootypoot 3mo ago

[flagged]

readthenotes1 3mo ago

Any president that wants to pause it can cite "national security". That sounds pretty reasonable since Israel spies on the USA a lot