cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/17490070
humanitarian organizations, many of which have been sounding alarms about the hunger crisis in Gaza for months, are not impressed. They argue that air and sea deliveries are not only an insufficient substitute for humanitarian aid delivered by land, but a dehumanizing one that acts as a distraction to the man-made barriers that have prevented more aid from getting into Gaza in the first place. “There is no good reason why aid cannot access Gaza by road today,”
So it is preferable for NATO to have an associate that will bomb babies, snipe kids, level hospitals, kill old people for fun, occupy and grab land by force (a total opposite of “defensive pact”) on a continent of the world where NATO countries have no land nor a plausible place as a so called defensive organization. Israel isn’t in NATO and even has no relation to NATO except if you count NATO as combined exploitative effort of the western countries on other continents.
Don’t forget how supporting Israel is literally why Osama Bin Laden carried out the 9/11 attacks.
Supporting Israel only benefits Israelis. The rest of the world loses billions of dollars every year because of israel’s occupation.
The only solution is for them to leave. These problems will not get solved otherwise.
The fact he mentioned it as a reason does not mean he was correct.
If I murder a family and say I did it because earth rotates around the sun, would you blame rotating earth for my actions?
It is preferable to have relationships with a country that is the only reason why terrorists groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas. Houthis, etc. and Iran don’t have nuclear weapons. I think that’s quite a good thing. Or would you like to live in the middle of a nuclear war?