pull down to refresh

Daniel Larison on Biden’s role in the war breaking out in Lebanon.
“The Israeli government assumes that the U.S. won’t withhold weapons, diplomatic support, or military protection under any circumstances, and that has encouraged Netanyahu to pursue increasingly aggressive goals. Because the U.S. shields Israel from military reprisals, as it did earlier this year during Iran’s missile and drone strikes, it has given Netanyahu free rein to lash out whenever and wherever he wants. The administration has dressed all of this up as preventing a wider regional war, but the reality is that they have simply delayed the conflagration while making it more likely that it will be even more destructive when it occurs.”
Biden is not responsible for anything. You can not blame vegetable.
Maybe you can blame Netanyahu, because this guy always starts agressions and wars.
And now please leave your houses and go away because we will be bombing the whole region in a few minutes.
reply
That's fair. It's hard to properly assign blame, when it's technically the president's fault, but the president is not sentient.
reply
Just curious, why dont we let them do their own thing? Just let them burn to the ground themselves. How quick do you think it would sort itself off, if everyone stopped trade with the two countries?
reply
I see this as two separate questions. If other governments stopped intervening, the material for war would be much more scarce and both sides would reduce the rate at which they expend it. I suspect they would pursue less violent resolutions to their disputes.
The trade point would mean placing a full embargo on both nations (until hostilities cease, I imagine). Typically, embargoes don't achieve the stated aims of those who enforce them. Regimes are usually strengthened by embargoes, because it's an external force for the public to unite against. That scenario would not go well, in my estimation.
reply
I feel the first situation might qork to their benefit.
reply
It's certainly what I'd like to see. It's also not realistic, at all. Even if NATO/America stopped supplying Israel, the Muslim nations funding Hezbollah aren't going to stop. I still think it would be better if the US stopped being involved.
reply
I think it would be good if the USA stopped involving itself in other peoples wars unless we actually have some tangible benefit.
reply
I don't think benefit is a strong enough restrictions. "War" is just a euphemism for "mass-murder campaign", so it should never be waged, except to defend against foreign aggression.
reply
I think there should be other ways of negotiation in this time and age.
reply
There are other ways, but the sociopaths in charge don't care about the costs of war, since other people end up paying them.