157
Israel tells Washington it plans imminent ground operation in Lebanon, U.S. official says
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
157 points (95.4% liked)
News
23413 readers
2365 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Paranoid isn't the word I was going to use, I was thinking 'self-obsessed'.
Seriously though, I think it's a little conceited to conceive of the escalating middle-eastern conflict as revolving around some personal vendetta against our specific domestic political party.
Netanyahu is an opportunist. A bunch of things came together to set the stage for this expansion, but he's been a imperialist with eyes for Lebanon and "Greater Israel" since at least when he served in the IDF, and he is not alone inside Israel, either. If he were ousted tomorrow, there's a greater than 50% chance a new zion-expansionist gets voted in after him. He's personally unpopular domestically - not because of his activities in the West Bank, Gaza, or Lebanon, but because he's cashing out Israel's diplomatic capital all at once and Israel is likely to see a period of isolation and an economic collapse once the dust settles. Israel was enjoying prosperity and a lack of consequences to their expansion through occupation and settlement before they turned Gaza to rubble, and Netanyahu has put that all at risk again by going in balls-deep and daring the US to pull him out.
Democrats would prefer Israel not make a bloodbath out of their carefully curated diplomatic embargo around the middle east, but they certainly still want Israel there acting as their proxy. Democrats won't risk being the ones to lose that foreign policy keystone by making any kind of opposition public, but if they can manage to get Netanyahu ousted their PR nightmare might finally come to an end.
I love how you lot swap between "ISRAEL IS UTTERLY RELIANT ON THE US AND DEPENDENT ON ITS OPINION" and "The US doesn't matter because a shitlib spoke"
Sorry for suggesting that a political leader is trying to help his political allies who are interested in assisting him in his ongoing goals, I'll remember next time that the US has no influence on Israel.
I've never suggested Israel is 'utterly reliant on the us', only that the US is their biggest ally protecting them from international sanction.
Netanyahu almost certainly is reacting to the political environment in the US, but I think it's more of an opportunity he seeks to exploit than a motivation for further expansion.
I also think Liberals tend to de-emphasize the importance of Israel to US foreign policy goals, which includes Democrats. I don't think most democrats would take action against Israel because most of them know that losing them in the ME puts most of their foreign operations there at risk. It's wishful thinking that the Democrats might be taking action if they weren't currently in an election against a fascist.
Yes, as we all know, Israel is our only ally in the region, and certainly a very reliable one. /s
Not many others with the same ideological alignment and geological position to exert control over access to trade routes through and around the Mediterranean, we don't.
To say nothing of the significance of Israel as an intelligence apparatus - Israel is probably the most important ally in that region by a mile.
Ah, yes, the important thoroughfare of Israel, the crossroads of the Middle East. Israeli shipping and port systems definitely aren't notoriously corrupt and inefficient, and we all know the importance of Israel's territorial waters, which don't even extend into the Red Sea, much less the Gulf of Suez. And who doesn't pass by Israel's Mediterranean territorial waters when shipping to many other countries, such as [checks notes] Turkiye, Syria, or Israel? Good thing we don't need other aligned states in the area which Israel agitates, like Egypt, or Saudi Arabia. I mean, imagine if Egypt had some sort of vital canal to world trade running through it, or if the Saudis' coastline extended along one of the most traveled shipping lanes in the world? Ha ha, wow, we would have to be really stupid to back Israel if that was the case!
Israeli intelligence is useful, but very far from indispensable, especially considering Israel's political objectives in presenting and sharing evidence.
Right, because countries can only really exert control and influence over their immediate surroundings. Especially when those countries have a willingness and motivation to use their significant intelligence/military funding, which is useful only to the immediate territorial boundaries of that area and not any further. I see no usefulness for, hypothetically, restricting Iranian diplomatic and militarization activities by having a nuclear superpower and counterintelligence capabilities with western ties and assets in the region.
Certainly not. Especially a nation whose aggression could be spun sympathetically as defensive against islamic/arabic [scary] antisemitism, if it were ever to occur, as opposed to a nation who may not have a compelling narrative of oppression, or isn't ideologically set in judeo-christian providence.
Get real. If Egypt clamped down on the suez canal they'd be thrown out of the UN and sanctioned so fast their economy would collapse before the first flood gate closed.
What is 1967-1975?
I find it amusing, as well, that you find Israel's military capacity to disrupt trade as important here. But I suppose that reflects your generally low level of education on the history and geopolitics of the region.
I find it amusing that your perspective is apparently that the region just isnt important, and our continued involvement and presence there (at great cost) is just some unexplainable enigma that boils down to personal grievances between leaders
It exists solely to suppress democratic electoral turnout i guess lmao
That's about the reading comprehension I expected of you as well.
And this is about the level of baseline antagonism i expected from you.