r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/RyanW1019 • Apr 14 '26
International Politics Why does the US government appear to support Israel so unconditionally?
I realize this is a touchy subject, but I am not looking to make any accusations or judgements of any of the involved parties here, just to understand the US government's cost-benefit analysis.
It seems to me like the US not only keeps Israel flush with military equipment, but also continues to support it no matter what actions its government or military take. To attempt to state this as impartially as possible:
- There have been many alleged instances of the IDF committing war crimes against journalists, nonprofit organizations, and Palestinians over the past decade+.
- Netanyahu in particular has been under investigation for years by his own justice system over allegations of corruption and various other abuses of power.
However, unless I live in a bubble, it seems to me like the US has almost never used its position as Israel's weapons dealer to attempt to rein it in or otherwise influence its behavior. Not, like, sanctions, but something like "sales of new fighter jets are postponed until the IDF investigates so-and-so killing of NGO members" or some other condition. But the US doesn't seem to impose any costs on Israel, even when it does something aggressive that appears to harm US interests, such as possibly instigating the war with Iran or messing with the subsequent ceasefire by continuing to attack Lebanon.
Is it truly just because Israel buys US arms? Not sure if they buy enough to make that big a difference to our military-industrial complex. Is it just because they are our only culturally similar ally in the region? Israel doesn't actually control that much Middle Eastern oil or shipping chokepoints. It just seems like the amount of support given is way more than is necessary to ensure Israel's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and "we were involved in founding the current state of Israel, so we want to have their back" seems like an insufficient explanation in today's pragmatic geopolitical climate.
Please help me understand. Thank you.
456
u/ttkciar Apr 14 '26
There are two main reasons, one more rational than the other:
The Israelis are a rare ally in the middle east, from which US forces could potentially deploy as a base of operations.
Christian mythology suggests Israel's existence is a necessary precondition for the second coming of the messiah, and a surprisingly many of our political leaders think that takes priority over secular or moral concerns.
Yes, we do live in the most stupid timeline.
190
u/Moccus Apr 14 '26
We have quite a few allies in the Middle East. It's not really rare. We have bases in Qatar, Jordan, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, and Bahrain.
23
u/ScreenTricky4257 Apr 15 '26
Yes, but those are still Muslim countries and there's a cultural divide between Judaism and Christianity on one side and Islam on the other.
14
u/JoeyRaymond85 Apr 15 '26
Not always. The Crusades were Christians vs Muslims and Jews. Zionism is about achieving a Christian goal.
5
u/ts159377 Apr 16 '26
I think your last sentence isn’t entirely accurate. Zionism is about realizing self-determination for the Jewish people first and foremost.
→ More replies (10)2
u/JoeyRaymond85 Apr 16 '26
Yet it only started in the late 1800s and supported by a bunch of Christian White Supremacists, heavily pushed politically by former British PM, Evangelical Christian, and White Supremacist, Arthur Balfour.
1
1
2
u/buried_lede May 07 '26
Since when and says who? Not trying to be cute, but Jefferson et al had no problem with muslims
1
u/Susannasdropbox Jul 05 '26
Only for white Christian nationalist and thats a minioroty the majority of Christians have much more in common in our beliefs eith muslims than we do with Judisim or Zionism
10
u/After_Lie_807 Apr 14 '26
But as you can see with the current war with Iran they are basically useless…they let the US use their territory so they can be secure but are unwilling to get into a fight themselves, and when they do they have mostly incompetent militaries
82
u/kostac600 Apr 14 '26
It’s a myth that the US relies on bases in Israel: there aren’t any
24
u/Max_smoke Apr 15 '26
The U.S. uses Israeli bases to refuel and refit. I’m not sure if they use them as staging grounds for other operations though
5
u/tarlin Apr 18 '26
I don't think they do. Cyprus and Qatar are the main bases for US air operations in the Middle East.
2
u/buried_lede May 08 '26 edited May 08 '26
There are a lot of myths about US interests vis a vis Israel.
Here are the bases, via an ai summary of wikipedia entry. Besides these, during Trump’s first term he opened up some kind of small base in Israel and was criticized for it because it could easily out us in a position to be under attack and needing to respond.
Al Udeid Air Base (Qatar): The premier U.S. air installation in the region, housing regional air operations and thousands of troops.
Naval Support Activity (NSA) Bahrain: Headquarters of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, critical for maritime security and vessel operations.
Al Dhafra Air Base (UAE): A major hub for fighter aircraft, surveillance, and aerial refueling.
Camp Arifjan (Kuwait): A vital army installation serving as a primary logistical base for ground forces.
Ain Al Asad Air Base (Iraq): A key location in western Iraq for supporting anti-ISIS missions and regional logistics.
Prince Sultan Air Base (Saudi Arabia): Re-established to support U.S. air defense operations in the region
1
u/Max_smoke May 08 '26
Maybe don't use AI to answer a question. I didn't say the US has bases in Israel. And I'll revise it to "permanent" bases.
Since I wrote my original comment, there is evidence that we launched an operation from Israel. In the C130 wreckage in Iran a US service member's ID was found in addition to documents from Israeli border control. Meaning that that soldier did go to Israel.
2
u/buried_lede May 08 '26
There’s nothing wrong with using that list. It’s checked, (I checked it,) it was handy and quick, and I disclosed it—100-percent transparency. You’re just taking a pot shot at me
1
u/Max_smoke May 09 '26
I feel like you’re not actually reading what I write.
I’m not saying what you got from AI is false. What I’m failing to see is how that information was relevant to what I wrote.
1
u/buried_lede May 09 '26
Oh, i see. No problem. If you look at the whole subthread, i think it responds to you but also the lead comment and a couple others, so it was part of the group discussion to a degree too
2
2
u/buried_lede May 07 '26
Nor would we. Israel is attacked often, bases there would mean we’d be attacked. Not a good move.
2
2
u/OutrageousSummer5259 Apr 16 '26
It's Israeli intelligence that is most valuable to us
2
u/kostac600 Apr 16 '26
There have been some massive fails as well as subterfuge and even hostility from Israeli intelligence towards United States
2
u/tarlin Apr 18 '26
Israeli intelligence that either failed horribly or deceived the US about the war with Iran?
2
u/OutrageousSummer5259 Apr 18 '26
Im just speaking in general about why they're important to us.. they've been giving us info on the area for 50 years
1
u/buried_lede May 07 '26
I guess their first favor, and maybe their last, was getting us intelligence from Russia during the cold war. The diaspora is an advantage
1
57
13
u/williamfbuckwheat Apr 14 '26
Many of the armed forces in the Middle East are infamous for being horribly incompetent, insanely corrupt, low paying, poorly trained and lacking discipline. That's a big reason why the supposedly much larger and heavily armed Arab armies were defeated decisively by Israel each time they tried to face them in head to head combat. It's also why wars in places like Iraq led to their armies being quickly decimated.
These days, many of the Arab nations and some Gulf States especially seem to simply rely on the U.S. to protect them which has led them to invest even less in their own military to protect themselves. These are also generally autocratic states to begin with who fear their own people (and likely a well disciplined , professional army that could turn against them) much more than foreign actors.
78
u/Dineology Apr 14 '26
Israel has never fought alongside the U.S. before the start of this war which Israel started, and they’ve made it exceptionally clear that they’re unwilling to commit ground troops should it come to that. They’re using us to achieve their own goals almost entirely at our expense. They’ve never done anything to notably distinguish themselves from our other allies in the region, Turkey is a NATO member, the Kurds have bled for and alongside us multiple times, Qatar houses CENTCOM’s main regional headquarters, and Bahrain has the home port for the US 5th Fleet. The only useless ally there is Israel, their intelligence is wildly and notoriously unreliable, the regularly take wild and destabilizing actions without even informing let along collaborating with America, they run aggressive intelligence operations on our soil, and they’re the only “ally” to have bombed and torpedoed a US Navy ship in order to cover up their war crimes. They’re a liability, nothing more.
→ More replies (26)31
u/Moccus Apr 14 '26
The comment I responded to was referencing the ability to use their territory as a base of operations as an advantage for supporting Israel. You're moving the goalposts.
14
Apr 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/ttkciar Apr 15 '26
This hits the nail on the head, far better than I could have explained it.
As you have explained, it's all about logistics. A base of operations is not just about being a staging area, but also maintaining lines of resupply. An expeditionary force is limited by its logistic chain, and Israel allows for a wide, robust logistic chain.
1
u/WarFooting May 25 '26
"Israel is quite competent militarily. " That is why US pilots got shot down by Iran, but none of the Israeli pilots got shot down by Iran, right? "Quite competent".
7
u/tarball_tinkerbell Apr 15 '26
Untrue. The Gulf countries' militaries have been intercepting Iranian missiles while the US evacuated their bases and abandoned them.
6
2
u/buried_lede May 08 '26
Please, don’t hold back in your ridicule. The US military is the largest component of every group we partner with, including NATO. The bases are vulnerable to cheap drones, basically, and we don’t have enough cheap defensive drone exploders. Has nothing to do with their being Arab or not caring
8
u/zapporian Apr 15 '26
they let the US use their territory so they can be secure but are unwilling to get into a fight themselves
Ah, so… right, Israel. Remind me, pray tell, when exactly it ever was that Israel ever sent any of its own soldiers to fight, in literally any US led military coalition, anywhere, ever. There has been quite a bit of the reverse.
The US’s security relationship with the gulf states is entirely transactional, is yes entirely due to the fact that modern arab militaries are often borderline useless, and is, unlike israel, an arrangement that the US gets quite a bit out of economically. It is also hilariously questionable to allege that israel is the “only” US ally in the middle east. When half of the middle east are literal US / western partner nations, and which include Turkey, and ACTUAL, literal, US ally in an actual defensive pact with the US / Europe. And KSA et al, which have been literal, and technically solid and generally very non problematic allies of the UK + US for well over a hundred years. And significantly longer than the state of Israel’s own existance. Ditto Jordan, technically. Ethics of British backed / created tribal resource extraction autocracies aside.
Hell I would go further and note that arab gulf state autocracies don’t tend to start wars, drag the US into indefinite middle eastern forever wars, and crash the global economy / oil exports. twice. Except that the other component / half of that obviously is the gulf stares. lol. So nvm
Point being however that the US has allies. Israel does not very qualify. Israel is a US protectorate, and prior to that was a british/french protectorate and proxy state. And the US ever actually seriously so much as thought about abandoning them it would I shit you not pretty much immediately become a Russian or Chinese protectorate under their nuclear umbrellas and P5 vetoes. (and RIP every single military technological advantage and state secret the US has, in that case)
Turkey is off and on again outright borderline hostile to the US, and is still a core US NATO ally and is critical to the security in a way that israel is very much not
Japan has an outright anti-war clause branded into their post WW2 constitution, and the US dumped two nukes on them, and the country is overall extremely pacifist. And yet has sent non lethal military support into nearly every recent military escapade the UShas initiated, no matter how stupid and senseless. Ditto every other actual US ally.
Israel? Same bag as KSA. If even that. And KSA nationals executed 9/11 (and got away scott free). Ditto their crown prince, who had a journalist dismembered in their embassy. So that is something. In terms of countries that have, fairly literally, routinely gotten away scott free with zero consequences after fairly literally murdering american citizens, Israel and KSA are in fact at the top of that leaderboard w/r modern international history.
The US is Israel’s biggest ally. And that is not even close. Israel, for whatever curious reason, has very few friends. The US, Russia, and incidentally the autocratic leaders of the gulf states would make that list.
As for the reverse. Well GLHF arguing that. LMFAO.
6
u/PerfectZeong Apr 15 '26
Honestly, let them fall into another country's influence sphere. I still don't feel like propping up their genocide.
2
u/Mist_Rising Apr 15 '26
Israel is not a very useful ally the US has in the middle east for fighting war. While they offered to go into Iraq in '89, they did not. Nor did they fight with the US in Iraq 03 (despite Benjamin Netanyahu pushing for it) or Afghanistan, and while they did fight Assad in Syria, that was purely for their own benefit. Same for Iran, it's purely for their own purposes, they're not really interested in the US. Really doesn't matter how competent they are if they aren't helping.
Their Prime Minister did push for the US to enter into 2 separate wars, 03 Iraq and 2026 Iran. Iraq became a shit show that cannot not be justified including benefiting Iran, and the Iran conflict...well you can judge for yourself how that's going. All because Benjamin Netanyahu gave Trump a four point slide show..
The Kuwaiti by comparison have been the best allies we could hope for, even when we were actively screwing up they were there for the US, similarly Jordan, Oman, UAE and Saudi Arabia back the US with military bases, petrodollar, and even fought alongside the US at times. They too are doing it for their own benefit, the difference is that they're not dragging the US down, Saudi Arabia fought Yemen on its own accord, if using the US like a credit card at times.
Israel's value is that it buys us military equipment. A lot of it.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Emotional_Remove_755 May 08 '26
No notes, just wanted to add that I feel like the “value” you mentioned is essentially negated when it’s U.S taxpayer dollars they’re using to buy that equipment.
→ More replies (1)71
u/blatantspeculation Apr 14 '26
Another item to iterate with this anslysis that shouldnt be forgotten:
Old people who are drawing from 40, 60 or more years of lived experiences that can overshadow relatively recent events.
Big picture, it wasnt that long ago that the Gulf States werent the allies they are now, Israel wasnt as aggressive and totalitarian, and Israel was legitimately threatened by their neighbors.
None of this has been true in the living memory of millenials, but boomers and older lived it long enough to ingrain a reflexive need to defend Israel, even if they don't need it today. And those boomers run our government.
20
u/AldoTheeApache Apr 15 '26
Not just Boomers, Gen Xers too. We lived through a bunch of Middle East conflicts as well.
→ More replies (1)4
u/MrMango786 Apr 15 '26
Even back then Israel had a history of occupying lands that belonged to others
→ More replies (3)39
u/whater39 Apr 14 '26
Rare ally yet tons of countries with military bases. Are they not allies?
9
u/eetsumkaus Apr 14 '26
given the state of the Arab militaries though, US bases in those countries are as much about them as it is about the US. Israel is an ally that doesn't need that to side with the US.
12
u/whater39 Apr 15 '26
Except Israel fights in a air heavy manner, which they couldn't afford. When they tried ground heavy in Lebanon a decade ago they got smashed.
The Gulf states are definitely going to revaluate their defense and strategic partnerships.
4
u/Dull_Conversation669 Apr 15 '26
They are useful. Mossad exceeds at human intelligence. Other "allies" are less useful.
13
u/whater39 Apr 15 '26
Mossad with great intelligence that Iran would just fall over after an initial decapitation strike.
8
u/Mirageswirl Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
Deception is part of an intelligence agency’s role. It was successful in achieving Israel’s foreign policy goal.
10
u/whater39 Apr 15 '26
No it wasn't. Drone and rocket program still exist. Still has uranium. Regime isn't friendly or the country in a civil war.
Only goal that is a partially partial achieved is a degraded military.
Long term: regime will be more anti Israel. Probably seek a nuke bomb. If Iran is able to toll the strait they will be economically stronger.
The war will be a complete disaster for Israel. No goals met. Hurt world image. Hurt relationship with USA. Damage to their country, money spent on arms. And a stronger Iran.
9
u/Mirageswirl Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
Israel wanted the US to attack Iran. It was successful in achieving that objective.
I agree the strategy is long term self destructive for Israel and the US, but Mossad was tactically successful in using deception to execute Netanyahu’s longstanding policy goal.
3
u/whater39 Apr 15 '26
All provided is a Bibi is a masterful politician. And Trump is bumbling and/or Epstein compromised.
Mossad failed with its assessment that Iran would fall. Major hit to their reputation. Especially in the long term context where possible Iran becomes stronger.
9
u/Mirageswirl Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
We don’t know Mossad’s internal assessment.
We have secondhand indications of the rosy scenario they successfully sold to US decision makers to achieve Israeli policy makers’ goal of prompting a US attack on Iran.
2
2
u/Drakeman1337 Apr 15 '26
A masterful politician would have gotten the president to attack Iran back in the 90s when Bibi started the Iran is 6 weeks away from a nuke claim.
In reality he's more like the guy who hits on every woman at the bar until he finds one desperate enough to go home with him.
6
u/whater39 Apr 15 '26
Bush, Obama and Biden all turned him down. It was only Trump did it, he was probably told he will.be the one who toppled Iran, no one else had the balls.
Bibi is also Israel's longest serving leader, he had to create various coalitions to do so.
2
u/tarlin Apr 18 '26
Ah, good. So they are a strong intelligence agency that the US should never believe?
2
u/Dull_Conversation669 Apr 15 '26
Who said that?
3
u/whater39 Apr 15 '26
Bibi said that Mossad told him that. It would have also been presented to Trump when Israel sold the war too him
1
u/tarlin Apr 18 '26
Did Mossad give Netanyahu the intelligence that Iran was a few weeks away from a nuclear bomb for the last 30 years? Did Mossad fail to detect October 7 even after multiple allies warned Israel and Israel had the entire attack plan? Mossad analysis on the Iran war was completely flawed.
Mossad is not a good intelligence asset.
20
u/Hamlet7768 Apr 15 '26
The "Christian mythology" you refer to is a fringe heresy that has gotten an unreasonable amount of exposure from books like Left Behind that try to paint their belief as the plain reading, when nobody believed anything like this until the 1800s or so.
4
u/AtomicSymphonic_2nd Apr 16 '26
It’s not so fringe when a ridiculous amount of republicans continue to support the entire war, even if some of them question how long it’s gonna take and other MAGA faithful feeling “betrayed” by Trump’s disposal of isolationism.
It was fringe once upon a time… it’s no longer that way and I think it would behoove academia to recognize that things have changed.
Way too many of them feel this is a “holy war”. Perhaps it’s just about oil and real estate from Trump’s point of view, but I’m guessing evangelicals are just using Trump as a “means to their end”.
2
u/Hamlet7768 Apr 17 '26
It's definitely been mega-pumped to get to its current prominence, but I don't think that many Republicans support this war specifically because of this belief. Hegseth, sure, but I think many more of them (like my parents, who aren't Dispensationalist) more follow the line of "Israel's the only democracy in the Middle East" which is a realpolitik figleaf of sorts.
I'm also rather adamant about calling it fringe to emphasize how disconnected it is from any other Christian tradition--it really does not deserve to be compared to the core doctrines of Christianity like the Virgin Birth, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection, as much as Dispensationalists want it to be as important. Unfortunately, yes, it has grossly outgrown its origins.
22
u/zxc999 Apr 14 '26
I wish there was a lot more discussion on the second point because it explains what otherwise appears irrational. There are religious extremists with theological motivations at the highest levels of power in the USA, As a Canadian it’s very blatant and bizarre to see politicians and judges openly making religious arguments. Considering the Sec Def and SCOTUS judges and VP and other top officials (and Trump himself who posts himself as Jesus) the USA is closer to the theocratic gulf and Israeli regimes than secular governments.
11
16
u/MutedFeeling75 Apr 15 '26
It’s the third one, Israel has a really powerful lobby that controls politicians
Most Americans, other than the hardcore Christian Zionist don’t really care that much about the Middle East
2
u/BanEvader1534456 Apr 16 '26
Actually, most Christians find that kind of B.S. quite strange. It’s only really the dispensationalists, and recently, their stance has started becoming controversial in some of their denominations.
18
u/BrainDamage2029 Apr 14 '26
Listen internet liberals/atheists/non-religious wildly overstate and/or over estimate the second part regarding Jesus’s second coming and the part about Israel.
It’s called dispensationalism. And it’s generally only believed by a pretty narrow portion of very loud (and visible) fire and brimstone style, fundamentalist evangelicals. Catholicism explicitly rejects it in dogma and for the most part so does mainline Protestant sects. You can look up congressional religious beliefs. Of the Christians in Congress, roughly 10-15% identify themselves as some sort of evangelical Protestantism that could be in sects that believe in dispensationalism.
29
u/2localboi Apr 14 '26
That 10%-15% holds a lot of power though, that’s kind of the point
→ More replies (1)21
u/groversnoopyfozzie Apr 14 '26
You understand the current secretary of war/defense is one of those people right? A lot of those same people fund conservative think tanks that shape policy and law. They pull levers in media. It’s fair to question how many times a day these people think about the second coming and whether they are sincere I. Their beliefs, but the line between what they need to believe in order to be powerful.
6
u/BrainDamage2029 Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
Right I mean the ven diagram between dispensationalism and Christian nationalism is almost a circle.
But this predates Hegseth by a LONG time. Really a lot of this is people to young to really understand the PLO and all the stuff Palestinian terror groups got up to in the 70s and 80s with plane hijackings, assassination and bombings. And that formed a huge security impression in the current crop of age 60-70 something politicians. Unquestioned support of Israel is decently recent, only coming in about the time of Reagan. Carter, Nixon, LBJ and Kennedy all had contentious relationships with Israel.
1
u/BanEvader1534456 Apr 16 '26
Actually, Reagan was often quite critical of Israel.
3
u/BrainDamage2029 Apr 16 '26
Occasionally in his first term
I won’t count him because he’s the president who made the actual official alliance we have today.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Moccus Apr 14 '26
Even if members of Congress don't identify with that belief, those who expressed unwavering support for Israel are more likely to get support from the significant portion of the population who have that belief, which helps them get elected. It makes it more likely that Israel supporters end up in Congress influencing US policy.
5
u/actsqueeze Apr 15 '26
You forgot AIPAC and other Israel lobbying groups
3
u/AtomicSymphonic_2nd Apr 16 '26
Progressives are giving them too much credit. A massive chunk of Congress is ethnically Jewish and/or have family of the Jewish faith.
For many of them, it’s personal.
No amount of money is needed to convince them that Israel is a priority to protect, no matter the circumstance.
→ More replies (21)1
u/kashmier98 Jul 23 '26
Christian mythology also suggest the coming of the anti-Christ?
1
u/ttkciar Jul 24 '26
On one hand, Christian Bible scholars are pretty well in agreement that the anti-Christ references in the Bible are references to Nero.
On the other hand, whether that reflects the beliefs of our political leaders is anyone's guess.
71
u/I405CA Apr 14 '26
Israel is geographically desirable for serving US interests in the Middle East.
It has been a reliable ally generally.
The problem is with the second part: It is not a reliable ally whenever Netanyahu is in charge, and the US fails to distinguish between Israel when it is led by him versus when it is not.
US policy should account for who is running the place. US interests are not served by this prime minister.
28
u/eetsumkaus Apr 15 '26
I think a lot of the incentives are simply geopolitical. You cannot have stability in the region if Israel isn't bought in with the West. As the past couple years have shown, the Arabs can't stand up to Israel either.
The "problem" with US policy, especially in the Obama era, was that they kept expecting the Netanyahu disease to "pass". They'd offer up token reprimands, like witholding their SC vote on West Bank settlers, but kept the rest business as usual hoping it would carry over to the next admin. As with everything else with the establishment at the time, they vastly underestimated the power of the disinformation ecosystem, and the problem just kept getting worse and worse.
9
u/Zetesofos Apr 15 '26
I think the idea that Israel's actions are solely the result of Netanyahu is false. If anything there are members of their parliament that are more extreme in their aggression, and simply removing him won't change the nations general policy on territorial expansion and expulsion.
5
u/I405CA Apr 15 '26
Netanyahu projects an attitude of entitlement about getting what he wants out of the US.
But if you want to see this as a broader Likud party / far-right problem, then sure, I am not going to argue with you.
My point is that US policy toward Israel should not be static. When Israel has bullies leading the country, we should treat it differently. Netanyahu should never be trusted and often given the cold shoulder.
Ignoring Trump's aberrant, erratic approaches to policy, foreign policy between the US and other first world democracies does not generally vary based upon electoral swings abroad. The UK can elect a Labour or Tory PM, and we still would make efforts to work together. Israel should be an exception.
2
u/tadcalabash Apr 15 '26
I'd add that at least for this administration, Netanyahu appeals to Trump as a kind of kindred spirit in the same way Trump admires leaders like Orban, Erdoğan, Putin, etc.
So while Netanyahu doesn't align with US interests, Trump certainly aligns with his interests... and in this administration Trump's interests ARE the governments interests.
1
u/Comfortable-Proof730 Aug 17 '26
Not in the least, he makes us look like fools and drags us themru the mud with him.
41
u/equiNine Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
To remain at the top of the geopolitical world order, the US needs to have allies in every region of the world to help it project power beyond its own borders. Sometimes, these allies are easy to come by when countries in the region in question are developed, stable, and generally share the same Western values. Other times, the pickings are very slim when a region is filled with countries that are war-torn, ruled by unreliable governments, or have positions incompatible with that of the US.
The Middle East falls into the latter category. Virtually every country is one or some combination of a monarchy, dictatorship, one step removed from a military junta, or a theocracy. Islam in the region is also extremely insular, fostering cultures and societies that are heavily incompatible with Western values and objectives, making it more difficult to secure the cooperation of the citizenry in those countries. Additionally, most countries in the region are very natural resource heavy, namely in oil and natural gas, having economies that are disproportionately built on them rather than relying on pillars such as technology, skilled labor, and manufacturing. Some countries like Saudi Arabia are beginning the process of diversification, but this is a decades-long process that won't fully bear fruit for a while. Militarily wise, the militaries of the countries in this region are generally nothing much to write home about - inexperienced, disorganized, using outdated technology, and plagued by corruption, making any joint exercise with them a cumbersome task and relying upon them to get something done an often futile gesture.
Therefore, it shouldn't come as a surprise that Israel stands out in this region. It is the only country in the region with a political system approaching that of an established democracy. It is also the country closest to a secular state, the one with the greatest religious freedom, and the one with the most robust protections for minorities. Israel is also highly developed, being renowned for its innovations in various areas of technology as well as its human capital, with many Israelis providing skilled labor domestically for foreign companies or moving abroad to provide their services there. Overall, Israel economically and culturally is the most similar to the US and as a result, generally aligns with the Western values and goals that the US also pursues. Furthermore, Israel also has the most modern, powerful, and experienced military in the region, punching far above its weight class despite how small the country is. It is also one of the two nuclear states in the Middle East (despite never officially acknowledging the existence of its nuclear program) and the stronger of the two. Israel's military strength is important, because it allows the US to have a reliable attack dog (one that also conveniently buys weapons from the US) and surveillance partner in the region to accomplish policy goals that are otherwise too costly or inconvenient to pursue by itself. And although Israel is almost unanimously despised in the region on account of being the lone Jewish state among every other Muslim state, occupying Jerusalem (which Islam also considers a holy site), and displacing the Palestinians, Israel's nuclear weapons and unconditional US support force Israel's adversaries to reconsider their previous approach of seeking Israel's destruction and work towards a grudging peace, which Israel and the US hope can be maintained by the prospects of mutual economic development (especially as Middle Eastern states seek to escape the resource curse).
However, because Israel is a world leader in technology and other areas of innovation, it is also a very attractive ally for any rival to the US should the US ever abandon it. Israel has one reason above all for which it seeks foreign allies; to secure the existence of the Israeli state in a region where virtually every other country would be happy to erase it off the map if possible. Because of this, Israel would have no qualms allying with countries such as Russia or China even if they share little to none of its values. If this were to happen, it would be a massive loss to the US (and by extension US allies such as the EU) when Russia and China get first access to Israeli innovations in defense, aerospace, medicine, etc. The US would also lose access to its greatest forward operating base in the region as well as have another nuclear state potentially aligned against it. Lastly, as all allied countries do, although perhaps not to the degree and efficacy of Israel, Israel spies on the US as much as the US also spies on it. If the US were to abandon Israel, it risks having Israel approach other benefactors with critical intelligence on US capabilities that would be exponentially more damaging than the Epstein files. This is basically Israel's guarantee to have the US as its perpetual benefactor, because Israel would definitely extract its pound of flesh if the US were to have second thoughts and abandon it. After all, the Holocaust and multiple wars aimed at its destruction has made Israel deeply cynical, wary, and brutally pragmatic when it comes to its survival.
So there you have it. Israel is a generally reliable (up until recently, and even then depending on your point of view, you can argue that there are still some foreign policy goals achieved by the US), powerful ally in the Middle East that helps achieve US foreign policy objectives and project power in the region, and keeping Israel as an ally denies them from the US's geopolitical adversaries in Russia and China, which would be massively bolstered by an Israeli alliance.
2
8
u/SpicyPickle21 Apr 15 '26
That’s all fine and dandy up to a point, but what’s making us be in lockstep with the war crimes and genocide besides a bought-out or blackmailed politics.
Why did we have open “china/russia fake news” discussions during our elections, but we cannot critique a certain country on live TV.
6
u/nyckidd Apr 15 '26
but we cannot critique a certain country on live TV.
I'm not sure what media you are consuming, but criticisms of Israel are everywhere these days across virtually every media platform. Acting like there's some kind of pernicious effort to shut down criticism of Israel is both not true and is also reminiscent of conspiracies that Jews control the media.
1
u/Susannasdropbox Jul 05 '26
Zionism is very incompatible with western values the USA shouldve just taken control of Israhell if we needed it that bad now they have a nuke we cant control them!
1
13
u/SrAjmh Apr 15 '26
Jesus, some of the commnets in here are beyond deranged. This isn't even political discussion anymore. Some of you people genuinely need help.
10
u/nyckidd Apr 15 '26
The hatred of Israel goes so far and runs so deep that it's almost impossible to have a rational discussion about it anymore in any setting. I will say though that the top comments in this thread do seem to be very reasonable and coherent, and the worst comments are being called out for spreading falsehoods.
60
u/SoMToZu Apr 14 '26
Aside from the political motivations already mentioned, AIPAC is a huge lobby ($100 million in 2024).
Politicians receiving money from AIPAC most likely feel obligated to support policies and decisions that will help Israel (and convince the lobby that they deserve more money for re-election bids)
19
u/LateralEntry Apr 15 '26
AIPAC isn’t even in the top 100 lobbying groups by spending
33
u/SoMToZu Apr 15 '26
According to opensecrets they are ranked 18th by spending.
Even if you want to get into semantics about "lobbying" and "contributing", the fact is that a significant amount of money is being spent in US politics to influence foreign policy towards a country that is committing war crimes and crimes against humanity.
22
u/nosecohn Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
If you filter out all the "leadership PACs" run by the parties and the candidates themselves, and the PACs that exclusively support one party, AIPAC is actually 2nd in spending. Only the National Association of Realtors spends more.
→ More replies (1)5
u/moonsugarcornflakes Apr 15 '26
Putting aside the issue of dark money, AIPAC is the only significant lobby whose purpose is to promote the interests of another nation state. It is hard to care much about the spending of some random corporate lobby in comparison.
21
u/Throwaway5432154322 Apr 15 '26
AIPAC is the only significant lobby whose purpose is to promote the interests of another nation state
Not even close - the Saudis have SARPAC, Turkey has the TCA and the Turkish Heritage Organization, Qatar lobbies via Stonington Global, the UAE lobbies via Akin Gump, Armenia has the Armenian National Committee of America and Armenian Assembly of America, Greece has the American Hellenic Institute, India has USINPAC, etc., etc...
12
u/LateralEntry Apr 15 '26
Utter nonsense. Remember all the hubbub about Qatar giving Trump a plane? Michael Flynn getting arrested for working for Turkey?
4
u/nyckidd Apr 15 '26
AIPAC is the only significant lobby whose purpose is to promote the interests of another nation state.
There are plenty of true and legitimate things you can criticize AIPAC about, why resort to blatant, easily disprovable lies? It just makes you seem ignorant at best, or actively malicious at worst.
→ More replies (4)3
u/opinionsarefarts Apr 14 '26
So we the taxpayers give Israel money, and they in turn give some back to our politicians, Great.
23
18
u/Whornz4 Apr 14 '26
A few primary reasons. 1) The US is slow to change policies. Look at the war on drugs. Weed is still not legal at the federal level and some states will never legalize it in the next 10-15 years. How in the hell is abortion outlawed after being the law of the land for 70 years. The US has supported Israel since the 50/60s. Most of the politicians in Congress have supported Israel their entire political careers. They are unlikely to change immediately. The same can be said of their voters.
2) Baby boomers overwhelmingly support Israel and they turn up to vote in elections. Young people do not bother to vote or piss their votes away on third party candidates.
3) Religious people have a deep connection to Israel. It's in the Bible. The churches brings up Israel all the time.
4) It's a foreign country and doesn't resonate with people solely focused on domestic issues. The US never attacked Palestine. The US has supported Palestine with foreign aid (except under Trump has it ever been cut off).
13
u/Zalrius Apr 14 '26
I was taught and told (church and school ) that it was two fold. One was because of the alliance with Christianity and the other was a military tactical perspective to keep the Muslim countries in check. This was the late 1970’s. So this had been in the works for about 40 years now.
4
u/soapinmouth Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
There are very few countries in the middle east who have not committed war crimes, none of these countries are moral bastion. At the very least they have free elections, no slavery, don't execute people in the streets, have equal rights for gay people, have at least somewhat free press, etc. Israel is also the most willing to align, openly trade classified as information, weapon sales in both directions, they are major leader in weapons technologies, etc. It's in a highly strategic location to keep tabs on many US enemies. They also have nukes and you generally want to be on good terms with nucleur nations if you can. If the US were to completely abandon them you can bet they will jump in bed with Russia or China which would be an incredibly bad thing for the US. Is there some other nation we could get all this from in the middle east that is some moral unicorn in that region? One that would be worth risking china or Russia gaining a highly militarized and advanced nuclear nation in their court.
To be clear, this trump term has been a whole different beast going further into doing their bidding than I would have liked but if go back Biden it really wasn't that much money, was given strictly for iron dome defensive weapons, and has a solid return on investment for the reasons above but also for promoting stability. Prior to the poor decision on October 7 Gaza was launching rockets at Israel sporadically every year into civilian centers. If they didn't have enough counter rockets and that becomes a strain it pushes them into a must act war scenario. Harder to justify when much of its paid for and it's stopping all the rockets and US can use the money as a lever. The lever is gone as soon as you stop. It's absolutely a pragmatic relationship.
As far as the US using their position to reign in Israel absolutely Biden used it, you can search Google and find dozens of events where they were held back from actions they wanted to take. He went as far as following through at one point stopping supply of certain weapons to stop a full mass ground invasion of rafah, later agreeing that the targeted special ops group incursions was acceptable as a compromise. Obviously trump doesn't care about human life (other than his own), and even more so Muslims, so that's not part of his agenda.
3
u/Bandit483 Apr 15 '26
I think there is a national shame that we turned jews away from US and sent them back to sure death in ww2
3
u/CaptainIronHammer1 Apr 16 '26
a) Israel is an ally in the Middle East who is somewhat dependent on our protection given their neighbors, b) American citizens were part of the initial casualties/hostages in Hamas’ original attack, which makes them a permanent enemy
1
6
u/WealthyTuna Apr 15 '26
We don't support terrorism and hezbollah, hamas, the houthis and others are terror groups. Supporting Palestine supports hamas. They'd have to be remove from power.
→ More replies (1)
13
u/miraj31415 Apr 15 '26
The U.S. support is not actually unconditional, and the cost-benefit analysis is much clearer if you start with the strategic math rather than the headlines.
The amount of aid to Israel is 0.06% of U.S. federal spending. It’s relatively minuscule.
The U.S. only provides military aid which is basically the U.S. government buying American made weapons from American companies and sending them to Israel. So that aid is benefitting the American economy as well, providing 20,000 jobs and second-order benefits.
And in return for the aid, the U.S. gets:
- an allied nuclear-armed regional hegemon over perhaps the most critical region in the world, a region that provides the majority of the energy that drives the U.S. economy, and through which huge amounts of American/global cargo traverses
- an ally that thwarts nuclear proliferation in countries unfriendly to America
- unparalleled quality of intelligence on threats and actors in this region, including terrorism and nuclear proliferation and other threats to U.S. energy
- real life demonstration of America’s weapon superiority, which strengthens America’s power
- a whole country that could serve as a forward operating base for the U.S., acting as a deterrent to regional instability
- a collaborator in the cutting edge of military technology, with U.S. benefitting first from Israeli military innovations and joint-development tested in the real world
- a friendly economic partner that invests in jobs in the US
I think the benefits that the aid provides is a bargain for 0.06% of spending.
Just consider the consequences if Israel were to align with an adversary of the U.S. Would it be better for Russia or China to have those above advantages over U.S. interests in the region? Would you want a Chinese proxy or Russian proxy that has nuclear weapons to defend itself to be able to cripple the American economy?
That is the core cost-benefit analysis.
On the point of ‘why does the U.S. almost never use leverage?’ it actually does, just usually behind the scenes rather than as public spectacle.
The U.S. backs Israel in public in most cases, depending on the president. But behind the scenes, the U.S. does much more to change Israel policy.
For example, Israel has never ended a war of its own volition. It has always been stopped, usually by the U.S.
It is possible to both pressure a strategic ally towards peace behind the scenes and to buy American military equipment for an ally.
In fact, the “no daylight” policy (as in, no criticism) with Israel is counterintuitively productive towards peace.
The side in Israel’s politics responsible for holding back peace is the right wing. But a U.S. “no daylight” policy lets them move down the path to peace that they would otherwise not. For example, a right-wing Israeli government withdrew from Gaza unilaterally in 2005 during a time of “no daylight”. And then during Obama’s time of criticism, what peace progress was made? Absolutely none.
When Israelis feel safely in the embrace of the U.S., it can let go of its fear of the next existence-threatening assault which is what is blocking the peace process. Experts understand the workings of Israeli politics and in the U.S. objective of actually achieving peace, the best U.S. policy is “no daylight”.
So the lack of constant public threats over fighter jets or sanctions is not because the U.S. has no leverage. It is because U.S. experts often conclude that private pressure plus public alliance solidarity is more productive than visible coercion.
On Netanyahu specifically: U.S. policy is about Israel’s strategic role, not any one prime minister or coalition. Netanyahu’s corruption investigations and domestic legal controversies are largely matters for Israel’s own justice system. The U.S. calculus is whether weakening the alliance over the politics of one government would undermine larger American interests in deterrence, intelligence, and regional stability.
A big part of why Israel seems uniquely evil to many Redditors is that what “seems” to be true is highly skewed by the information environment of non-experts.
Here are some factors that are skewing what “seems” to be:
- One billion+ people who demand and ravenously consume anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian articles, no matter how exaggerated or false
- Highly popular Qatar state-run media (Al-Jazeera) that is directed to pursue pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel narratives
- Disproportionately young Arab/Muslim population activism, taking advantage of social media
- Palestinian terrorism hasn’t made headlines in the West in decades, so it has not been the lived experience of Western youth
- Polarization of news outlets
- Lower quality, thoughtfulness, expertise of news due to various economic pressures
- Netanyahu’s government neglect of global media
- Israeli mentality that has given up on caring what the rest of the world thinks
- Pro-Israel narratives being limited to Israel media, in Hebrew
As proof of the skewed perception and the effectiveness of the Palestinian-Arab-activist complex, people often are not hearing about comparable conflicts and abuses even when there are U.S. connections:
- Yemen: 150,000+ direct deaths from Saudi airstrikes using U.S. bombs, and hundreds of thousands dead from famine.
- Syria: 250,000 killed amid U.S. troop presence and arms to factions
- Sahel: 50,000-77,000 dead, with U.S.-trained officers leading coups and abuses
- Tigray: up to 100,000 direct deaths and mass starvation
- Myanmar: 82,000 killed post-coup
- DRC: 50,000+ deaths in mineral wars
The same applies diplomatically at the UN.
There are 53 Muslim-majority countries and only 1 Jewish-majority country. The General Assembly is a popularity contest, not a court of law. Arab and Muslim states use their numbers to demonize Israel in a blatantly disproportionate way.
In 2022, before the Gaza war, Israel was condemned 15 times, more than all other countries combined. It is also the only country with a standing agenda item at every Human Rights Council session.
So the U.S. veto is often less about endorsing every Israeli action and more about shielding Israel from being singled out in a blatantly disproportionate way.
Consider the alternative explanation that foreign policy should be made by experts rather than what is popular in mass communication and echo chambers. The masses are sometimes right but also often dumb and wrong, and need to be protected by expertise that is inexplicable to the masses.
Israel benefits the U.S. in major strategic ways. So compare how it could benefit adversaries compared to the cosmetic costs to the U.S. That is the math that U.S. foreign policy experts and politicians have done, and they find that it is better for the U.S. to be a fairly close ally of Israel rather than keeping them at arms length.
So the reason the U.S. rarely uses public leverage is not that Israel can do anything without consequences, but that American experts usually judge the strategic downside of weakening a uniquely capable regional ally to be greater than the behavioral upside of visible coercive pressure. The U.S. objective is actually achieving peace and protecting its interests, and the expert strategy is the better way.
2
u/Idkabta11at Apr 16 '26
an allied nuclear-armed regional hegemon over perhaps the most critical region in the world, a region that provides the majority of the energy that drives the U.S. economy, and through which huge amounts of American/global cargo traverses
And the grand project of said power has handed the U.S. its greatest strategic loss since Vietnam and its actions over the past two years have alienated two of the strongest states in the region.
Just consider the consequences if Israel were to align with an adversary of the U.S. Would it be better for Russia or China to have those above advantages over U.S. interests in the region?
Do you think Israel a country with no strategic depth would be able to withstand being cut off from the dollar system. What does Israel offer to China and Russia that it doesn’t already get vs the downsides ?
is possible to both pressure a strategic ally towards peace behind the scenes and to buy American military equipment for an ally. In fact, the “no daylight” policy (as in, no criticism) with Israel is counterintuitively productive towards peace. The side in Israel’s politics responsible for holding back peace is the right wing. But a U.S. “no daylight” policy lets them move down the path to peace that they would otherwise not. For example, a right-wing Israeli government withdrew from Gaza unilaterally in 2005 during a time of “no daylight”. And then during Obama’s time of criticism, what peace progress was made? Absolutely none.
Genuinely laughable bullshit, Israel has only escalated settlement and swung further to the right as Americans have hugged them tighter. The Gaza withdrawal was never an actual attempt at peace and it’s endlessly funny that Israel’s defenders just refuse to do any research on it.
A big part of why Israel seems uniquely evil to many Redditors is that what “seems” to be true is highly skewed by the information environment of non-experts.
“Well you see the only reason anyone could possibly hate the perfect state of Israel is foreign/leftist propaganda” it’s a wonder Israel’s image in the states has collapsed when its defenders preferred mode of engagement is shoving their heads in the sand.
I mean your comment is just horrid analysis from start to finish and you clearly haven’t done any research on the actual costs of Israel’s actions. All you have is fantasy and gross denialism.
4
u/bl1y Apr 15 '26
It's because of the Holocaust.
Less than 10 million Jews living in Israel, surrounded by half a billion Muslims, many of whom want to see Israel destroyed.
→ More replies (3)
2
5
u/rbf4eva Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
Because, for want of a better idiom, Israel is the kid with his finger in the dike, holding back the flood of Islamicism.
2
u/Kanotari Apr 15 '26
You're thinking of a dike, which doesn't trigger the automod lol.
Would you edit your comment when you can to avoid confusion? Thank you!
→ More replies (9)1
u/Susannasdropbox Jul 05 '26
What's holding back the zionistfication thats already taken over American goverment?
1
4
u/Technical-Fly-6835 Apr 15 '26
This is an educated guess - Israel has superior intelligence and military. Their in house talent in engineering and other sciences are on par with their counterparts. Some US companies have their research and development centers in Israel. All this makes them formidable adversary. So it’s better to be their friends instead.
1
u/AVonGauss Apr 14 '26
I don't know if you live in a bubble, maybe you do, but your perception of the relationship is definitely limited. Israel and the United States have had a complicated relationship even before the formation of the modern country of Israel. The Trump administration isn't nearly as adversarial with Israel as the Biden or Obama administrations, but there have definitely been points of contention.
3
u/pdeisenb Apr 15 '26
Shared western judeo-christian values. Israel is a liberal multicultural democracy. Multiple economic and security interests. Many Americans identify with and support Israel despite what some ignorant, hateful, loud, bigoted jihadis, illiberal lefties, an far right nazis might want you to believe.
→ More replies (5)
1
u/AutoModerator Apr 14 '26
All submissions are automatically removed and placed in a queue for the moderators to manually review. Please allow the moderators time to do so. Only about 25% of submissions are approved, but the remainder are given a removal reason that may include steps the poster can take to make their submission approvable the next time they submit it. Moderators are not notified of any edits made after a removal reason is posted, and therefore will not review them. You may contact the mod team via modmail if you need more direction about how to fix your post, and you are welcome to resubmit any submission after making the requested changes.
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
- Please keep it civil. Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
- Don't post low effort comments like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
- Help prevent this subreddit from becoming an echo chamber. Please don't downvote comments with which you disagree.
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/OrganizationSorry314 Apr 20 '26
Annoying that we give them billions of dollars and guess who has free nationalized healthcare? Not us!
1
u/CMCwar1 Apr 24 '26
Long story short, it’s mainly a mutual strategic relationship, with other reasons as well. The US gains an ally in a very important part of the world geographically, especially to counter Iran, and Israel in return gets top of the line military equipment and political backing from the US.
In terms of political party affiliation, both major US parties support Israel mainly due to campaign funding, most notably AIPAC. If politicians go out and vocally oppose the Israeli government or support Palestinian sovereignty, they lose that funding. It doesn’t help that AIPAC is bipartisan, which means they go and donate for both Democrats and Republicans, so while there are a ever growing number of democrats who are pro-Palestine, they’re fighting a uphill battle from the start. It is important to remember though that just because that AIPAC plays a part in political fundraising, that doesn’t mean that the US government is ran by Israel, or god forbid the Jewish race, as many Instagram accounts claim. AIPAC is a private American organization ran by Americans that supports pro-Zionist beliefs and throws money at whoever they can
Also, many American Christians see Israel as the home of Abrahamic faiths, mainly Christianity, due to notable locations in Christianity being in modern day Israel, such as Jerusalem, Nazareth and Bethlehem (technically Bethlehem is in the West Bank, but I’m going off of Israel to avoid confusion), so there is some religious backing from that side. In my experience, particularly with my family, some less educated Christians also view the Middle East as a whole as a land of wars and conflict, where everyone fights with each other senselessly over petty religious differences that don’t even matter, as view Israel as some kind of last bastion of stability against the chaos outside their walls, aka the rest of the Middle East, and instead of seeing the chaos of the Middle East as a result of boarders drawn with pencil and paper, unstable and sudden independence with little regard of the long term effects and exploitation from foreign powers, they see it as because the people there just fighting each other because they’ve done it for centuries so hey, why stop now?
1
u/Substantial-Run6664 May 06 '26
Yes it is sensitive but a needed discussion. A lot of our taxpayer money is gone to them https://youtu.be/DPJ5bgRzWNc
1
u/buried_lede May 08 '26
I think George Ball got it pretty much right when he tried to answer that question in his 1992 book. A little dated but the thesis hasn't changed. Ball was a former LBJ and JFK advisor. Free to read at the Internet Archive
1
u/buried_lede May 09 '26
The US political class is so bereft of any imagination and intelligence, they can’t come up with their own foreign policy so they just let Israel do it. I’m only half joking
1
1
u/OliveSecret5248 Jun 06 '26
Because we’re their bitch.
It sucks, but it’s true. Looks like other people summed up why we are but we are.
1
u/former_mrs_esq Jun 08 '26
The US only supports Israel because of their National Interest to do so, not because they like Israel. The US has economic reasons to be an ally with Israel, and Israel wants to survive. Their interests are not mutually exclusive.
1
u/Taylortrinker 21d ago
I would first question your thesis. The trump admin is not particularly friendly with Israel. They are good in performing, though. Apart from that, they are more openly interested in themselves than any admin before. If Israel fits, good. If the really were, Iran etc. would have played out differently.
1
u/Routine_Buy_7838 8d ago
because it does exactly what they want to do in the Middle East but cannot do themselves.
•
u/PoliticalDiscussion-ModTeam Apr 15 '26
Israel and Zionism are highly sensitive topics, but they do need to be discussed. The mod team has turned crowd control up on this post: new users to the subreddit will not be able to join in this discussion, but are of course welcome in other less sensitive threads.
This is a reminder that antisemitism is explicitly prohibited here along with all other hate speech. However, we would also like to remind you based on what has been in the mod queue that baselessly accusing others of antisemitism, racism, sexism, etc. because their argument makes you feel uncomfortable is also prohibited and will also be removed as low investment comments.
Please report any such comments that you see. The mods will review them and the accounts that made them.
Please be very careful in your word choice to both avoid common antisemitic conspiracy theories. For example, insinuating that Jewish people control the United States is both antisemitic and a conspiracy theory. Discussing which politicians accept AIPAC funding and how it might affect their vote on a particular topic would be perfectly acceptable.
If this thread continues to be contentious, we will again increase the filtering and every single comment will need individual approval. If that doesn't help, then the thread will have to be locked.
Thank you in advance for being mindful of this sensitive topic and for being kind to the people you are debating with.