I mean, that is kinda true, they can’t stop it, but they can make it bloody difficult to continue, they can stop supporting it, just publicly saying “I implore the Israeli government to cease” would be good.
He could use that fucking awful AUMF bullshit to send in the U.S. military to attack the IDF, for that matter. “No power” is fucking nonsense.
Yeah, I know that is never going to happen, nor would I particularly want it to. But when you have the power to go that far, you have a fuck ton of options in between that and doing absolutely nothing (or worse than nothing, which is what Biden is doing now: providing them cover by pretending the empire doesn’t 100% have the fascists’ backs).
A goddamn big ol’ lie that is. The U.S. would not be afraid to push the envelope against most other countries. The U.S. military is capable enough to singlehandedly wipe out all of Israel and Palestine more than 10 times over in conventional warfare if it were so desired. Not that this is desirable, and it would cost many lives of the innocent and young, but I’m just speaking that this power and capability can’t really be hidden by pretending you can’t do anything about it.
If there was any value as a world of nations we could get out of such exorbitant expenses, it would be to establish peace and stop the fighting on both sides, by various means and escalating degrees of force if they really were compelled to. And even if we leave threatening or flexing military might out of the question, the U.S. has so many strings they can attach to how they support Israel with funding and arms, is it not obvious to this administration?
Where the heck is the notion that the U.S. government’s hands are tied coming from?
What would be so wrong with nuking Isreal? We give them 90 days to move and we render it uninhabitable. It’s the same as when they cut the baby in half in the bible. If people are going to squabble over a worthless area of land because of its historical significance, then we have a duty to put a permanent stop to it.
We have the tools even without nukes to raze land to the ground. Using a nuke might have the added bonus of “solve” climate change by making it a permanent nuclear winter.
Where the heck is the notion that the U.S. government’s hands are tied coming from?
At least part of the claim is that the president himself has little power. It’s the stupid finger-pointing game. “Biden needs Congress’ permission to do anything at all, ever.” 🙄
A useful excuse when the president doesn’t want to do anything. Falls flat on its face when he actually wants to bomb, shoot, or cage the shit out of any brown people, foreign or domestic.
As far as I understand the US political process, the President is allowed to do virtually anything so long as it doesn’t step on the states’ toes, but Congress has to pass funding and anything done by Executive Order can be done but can’t stick beyond his or her tenure.
Yeah, pretty much. The president has enormous power, and that power is even greater outside the country’s borders. Especially because of things like the “Authorization to Use Military Force” which gives him pretty much carte blanche to “fight terrorism” anytime and anywhere he likes.
There’s also this general process by which the president historically just does what he wants, and the rest of the government shrugs its shoulders and rolls over, and thus his office essentially just has that de facto power, no matter what the constitution or other laws say: Renegade Cut: No More Presidents.
The U.S. president is more powerful than any empire in the world has ever been, is pretty much a king, and basically does what he wants. Liberals often make excuses about how his hands are tied. It would be great if that were the case, but it’s really, really not.
Did you notice how the Dems responded to the Roe repeal? Not by using their majority to try and enact meaningful change. They fundraised off of it instead.
I’m no longer content to pretend the Dems are a bulwark against fascism when they’re just ushering it in.
Add comment