• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 小时前

    The Iron Dome is what allows Israel to act with impunity in the region, like kids burning ants with a magnifying glass or gods behind their perfect shield. Take that away, start raining rockets down on the Knesset, I think they’d change their minds about the war.

    Poor people are the weapon, but rich people live in very vulnerable areas that could be obliterated if they didn’t have interceptors.

    Now, if you’re saying that it’s impossible to remove Iron Dome funding, yeah, that’s basically true. The US will support Israel until one (or both) of them ceases to exist, there’s basically no path towards cutting funding through budget votes or amendments. Voting for this amendment would never pass a majority, it would just be a signal to voters (and donors) about her priorities.

    Voting against this amendment is also a signal, though, and what she signaled is that her priority is support for the Iron Dome.

    • Doom@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 小时前

      Okay.

      How does that lead to a solution? How does that not lead to more fighting and death?

      • limer@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        12 小时前

        So, a knight with shield and armor is killing people. Take away his defenses and he kills less. Yes?

        When the casualty ratio is more than 1:1000 and the only reason it’s like that is because of the armor . Then helping repair the armor is a war crime.

        Also stationing a huge USA navy fleet next to Gaza to prevent any organized from reaching Gaza is a war crime too. Having them move away will reduce the loss of life and allow food to reach the area.

        The United States is totally complicit in this

        • Doom@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 小时前

          Except in your analogy there are no women or children or noncombatants. So you think it makes sense. But it’s more like if you had an army of knights vs an army of peasants but both armies had babies tied to them and your goal is to stop the baby killing.

          Removing armor does nothing.

          The casualty ratio is because it’s specifically not a war. Israel claiming it is a war is part of their push. I know you know that though.

          So why didn’t MTG try to pass legislation to remove that fleet? Because that wasn’t her goal. Instead she managed to sow more division and get nothing done while stroking you all and making you feel justified and giving you a place to put your anger.