Quote (JessiWan @ 4 Jul 2024 01:09)
Why do you think feeding starving Americans is just a talking point?
And yes, I agree that there is a lot of useless government programs, but I don't think feeding the starving is one of them. In fact, ask the average American if he wants billions sent to Israel, or spent on Americans.
Why do we keep investing into luxury like NASA or broadband internet while there are starving Americans? Why do we increase teacher's pay while there are starving Americans? Why do we invest in roads and bridges while there are starving Americans?
The "would someone think of the starving Americans"-argument only serves to elicit an emotional response by postulating a false binary. There is plenty of reason to question the priorities in US spending, and it's also perfectly valid to question whether the spending on Israel's defense does provide adequate return on investment. But I, for my part, am not interested in having this discussion under a false premise.
Quote (Chainsaw47 @ 4 Jul 2024 01:20)
Is Israel really the power preventing such an uprising in the Middle East or could it be the American presence and the potential for a another war that’s keeping some groups quiet? If "shit hits the fan" at the magnitude you’re describing is Israel really in any capacity to defend itself? I’m all for having a strong presence in Israel if it acts as a deterrent, but it does have to be paid for entirely by the US when Israel and its population has a lot more to lose (i.e. their lives). If the threat you describe is real, shouldn’t Israel be more concerned by America’s strength than their own since they won’t be doing most of the fighting anyway?
Anyway, that’s all hypothetical and the day where someone gets elected and decides to cut spending is not in any foreseeable future.
Israel is armed to the teeth and has a long track record of fending off attacks by their Arab neighbors, who unsuccessfully teamed up on them on multiple occasions. If the entire Middle East gets into a blood frenzy and goes full zergling on Israel, they could probably overrun them with sheer numbers, but millions of them would die in the process and normal humans just aren't wired that way.
Also, it would absolutely be Israel which does most of the fighting if shit hits the fan. The US would mostly sit back on their carriers and support them from the air and sea. With how unpopular boots-on-the-ground operations have become since the Iraq War, the only scenario in which the US would perhaps still deploy a lot of them is if the governments of SA and the Gulf monarchies get toppled by hostile forces and someone has to go in and secure the oil fields of the ME from being seized by islamists or the Chinese.
Israel is in fact shouldering most of the cost of its security, be it in direct defense spending or indirectly in the form of a long and universal military service which decreases Israel's labor force potential.