Why Did U.S. Planes Defend Israel but Not Ukraine?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
On April 13, the Islamic Republic of Iran launched missiles and drones at Israel. Also on April 13, as well as on April 12, 14, and 15, the Russian Federation launched missiles and drones at Ukraine—including some designed in Iran.
Few of the weapons launched by Iran hit their mark. Instead, American and European airplanes, alongside Israeli and even Jordanian airplanes, knocked the drones and missiles out of the sky.
By contrast, some of the attacks launched by Russia did destroy their targets. Ukraine, acting alone, and—thanks to the Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives—running short on defensive ammunition, was unable to knock all of the drones and missiles out of the sky. On April 12 Russian strikes badly damaged an energy facility in Dnipropetrovsk. On April 13, a 61-year-old woman and 68-year-old man were killed by a Russian strike in Kharkiv. On April 14, an aerial bomb hit an apartment building in Ocheretyne, killing one and injuring two. On April 15, a Russian guided missile hit a school and killed at least two more people in the Kharkiv region.
Why the difference in reaction? Why did American and European jets scramble to help Israel, but not Ukraine? Why doesn’t Ukraine have enough matériel to defend itself? One difference is the balance of nuclear power. Russia has nuclear weapons, and its propagandists periodically threaten to use them. That has made the U.S. and Europe reluctant to enter the skies over Ukraine. Israel also has nuclear weapons, but that affects the calculus in a different way: It means that the U.S., Europe, and even some Arab states are eager to make sure that Israel is never provoked enough to use them, or indeed to use any serious conventional weapons, against Iran.
A second difference between the two conflicts is that the Republican Party remains staunchly resistant to propaganda coming from the Islamic Republic of Iran. Leading Republicans do not sympathize with the mullahs, do not repeat their talking points, and do not seek to appease them when they make outrageous claims about other countries. That enables the Biden administration to rush to the aid of Israel, because no serious opposition will follow.
By contrast, a part of the Republican Party, including its presidential candidate, does sympathize with the Russian dictatorship, does repeat its talking points, and does seek to appease Russia when it invades and occupies other countries. The absence of bipartisan solidarity around Ukraine means that the Republican congressional leadership has prevented the Biden administration from sending even defensive weapons and ammunition to Ukraine. The Biden administration appears to feel constrained and unable to provide Ukraine with the spontaneous assistance that it just provided to Israel.
Open sympathy for the war aims of the Russian state is rarely stated out loud. Instead, some leading Republicans have begun, in the past few months, to argue that Ukraine should “shift to a defensive war,” to give up any hope of retaining its occupied territory, or else stop fighting altogether. Senator J. D. Vance of Ohio, in a New York Times essay written in what can only be described as extraordinary bad faith, made exactly this argument just last week. So too, for example, did Republican Representative Eli Crane of Arizona, who has said that military aid for Ukraine “should be totally off the table and replaced with a push for peace talks.”
But Ukraine is already fighting a defensive war. The matériel that the Republicans are refusing to send includes—let me repeat it again—defensive munitions. There is no evidence whatsoever that cutting off any further aid to Ukraine would end the fighting or bring peace talks. On the contrary, all of the evidence indicates that blocking aid would allow Russia to advance faster, take more territory, and eventually murder far more Ukrainians, as Vance and Crane surely know. Without wanting to put it that boldly, they seem already to see themselves in some kind of alliance with Russia, and therefore they want Ukraine to be defeated. They do not see themselves in alliance with Iran, despite the fact that Iran and Russia would regard one another as partners.
For the rest of the world, there are some lessons here. Plenty of countries, perhaps including Ukraine and Iran, will draw the first and most obvious conclusion: Nuclear weapons make you much safer. Not only can you deter attacks with a nuclear shield, and not only can you attack other countries with comparative impunity, but you can also, under certain circumstances, expect others to join in your defense.
Perhaps others will draw the other obvious conclusion: A part of the Republican Party—one large enough to matter—can be co-opted, lobbied, or purchased outright. Not only can you get it to repeat your propaganda, but you can also get it to act directly in your interests. This probably doesn’t cost even a fraction of the price of tanks and artillery, and it can be far more effective.
No doubt many will make use of both of these lessons in the future.
Tags
Who is online
280 visitors
Play this ‘game’ as either/or and/or neither/nor and run the risk of your enemy stabbing you in the front while your friend stabs you in the back.
they didn't get a shout out in the bible and they were on the wrong side of illegal land annexations ...
WTF? This has nothing to do with Putin's reading (or not reading) the Bible (or for that matter Putin's reading/not reading The Holy Koran!
The difference between what Putin feels about the Ukraine vs what he feels about "Palestine" has nothing to do with he has read in The Bible-- or for that matter The Holy Koran. Here's the real difference:
1. Ukraine: Putin feels it shouldn't be independent but rather it is actually part of Russia that has illegally "seceded" from Russia. And remember-- previously, rather than being an independent country,it had indeed been part of the USSR (as "The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic"). So Putin personally feels that Ukraine is actually part of his country that should be taken back-- by force if necessary.
2. Israel/Palestine: Putin doesn't feel the same deep emotional ties to either Israel or "Palestine". Neither had ever been part of Russia, and personally he could care less about the fate of these areas, or the fate of their people.
If U.S. planes defended Ukraine from Putin's Russia, obviously Putin would be deeply upset-- and very angry! But the fate of either Israel, Gaza, The "Palestinians", etc are not issues close to Putin heart!
And there's another reason as well:
Simply stated, Putin had stated (or implied) that if the U.S. goes to war in defending Ukraine against what he considers to be part of his "Homeland" ("The Motherland" i.e. Russia)-- he would use nuclear weapons-- obviously the U.S. and our allies wouldn't want that!
But if if the U.S. took strong steps in defending Israel...well Putin obviously doesn't feel that Israel (or for that matter Gaza or the West back or Syria, etc) would be an attack on his homeland.
In summary-- Putin considers strengthening Ukraine's milirtay would be a direct threat-- strengthening israel's military is not a threat to Putin!
israel has launched attacks on syria, a russian ally ...
Because Israel has been and still is an ally. Ukraine not so much.
Exactly!
When the allaince between Israel and the U.S. is discussed, what's mostly discussed is how the U.S. supports Israel. But what rarely mentioned is how much Israel supports the U.S.
Iran is one of the cuntries that can be a serious threat to the U.S. But Israel can do things to thwart Iran's power in several ways the U.S. can't.
How?
Well for starters Israel has had many immigrants from Iran-- they are obviously fluent in Iranian languages-- and in addition have genuine accents (as many grew up there).
On more than one occasion, Israel has penetrated Iranian security and committed acts of sabotage on Iran's nuclear program, its military, etc.
Because Israel has been and still is an ally.
There are also other ways.
While many Americans are unaware of this-- iraq, under madman Saddam Hussein, was building a nuclear reactor! If completed obviously it would pose a significant threat to the region...and beyond. Attacking and destroying it was not something the U.S. would do.
But Israel did it-- thereby preventing Saddam's Iraq from becoming a nuclear power!!!
Operation Opera ( Hebrew : מִבְצָע אוֹפֵּרָה ), also known as Operation Babylon , was a surprise airstrike conducted by the Israeli Air Force on 7 June 1981, which destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor.
(Details HERE )
"By contrast, a part of the Republican Party, including its presidential candidate, does sympathize with the Russian dictatorship, does repeat its talking points, and does seek to appease Russia when it invades and occupies other countries."
I disagree. Where's the evidence of this assertion? Sounds like typical left-wing propaganda.
The US and Israel have a standing mutual defense cooperation treaty with each other while the US and Ukraine do not.
Good point!
And yet,there are those who would advocate abandoning our friends-- and our treaty obligations.
I would like to ask a question related to the support or non-support of Israel and Ukraine. Why do thousands protest and demonstrate against Israel, naming the conflict a genocide and chanting "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" but nobody pays much attention at all about the destruction in Ukraine, or about what's happening in Sudan. Does anyone wonder about that? I personally feel there is a reason for the difference, but I'm criticized for even thinking it.
Why do thousands protest and demonstrate against Israel, naming the conflict a genocide and chanting "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" but nobody pays much attention at all about the destruction in Ukraine, or about what's happening in Sudan.
People familiar with what's happening in the Sudan have described it as one of the worst, if not the worst, human rights trajedies now happening anywhere on the globe.
IMNSHO, the main reason so many self-proclaimed "advocates for human rights" totally ignore the widespread horrors of the situation in The Sudan is racism, pure and simple!
I have occasionally brought up the subject, but for whatever reason it hasn't received much attention here on NT.
[Although in all fairness, it should be mentioned that there have been a few (very few) here who have commented on the situation]
While there are those who have actually have not felt its important to support our allies (some even going so far as the say we should withdraw from NATO!
), some who have indeed spoken about the importance of keeping our word-- and especially the importance of aiding and assisting our allies when it matters.
Here's one significant example that:
After much speculation, Vice President Harris, now the Democratic nominee for president, came out with the strongest remarks so far on where she stands on the Israel-Hamas war and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
"Let me be clear, I will always stand up for Israel's right to defend itself and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself," she said tonight. She said that Israelis should "never again" go through the horror and "unspeakable" attacks of Oct. 7.
She must have horrified The Squad by saying that. So she said those words, but when Netanyahu spoke to Congress, representing the people of Israel, she preferred to speak to a VERRRRRY important group of college sorority sisters instead. When Biden speaks to the government of a foreign country, is he not representing his nation and its people? He damn well is, and IMO Harris shit on the people of Israel when she shunned Netanyahu's speech, and so since she shit on Israel, I shit on her, and that is why she would NEVER have got my vote if I were an American citizen.
Probably.
But here's something interesting-- two members of the Squad recently lost their primaries-- so will no longer be in The Squad. (And of course losing their primaries mean they will no longer be the Democratic nominee and therefore no longer be in office).
But here's something interesting-- two members of the Squad recently lost their primaries-- so will no longer be in The Squad. (And of course losing their primaries mean they will no longer be the Democratic nominee and therefore no longer be in office).
In addition something else I've recently noticed (others may disagree with me)-- for whatever reason, AOC seems to be making a deliberate attempt to move more to "the middle"-- she seems to have moved away from her more leftist views-- seems to be attempting to be more moderate).
Harris will never get your vote?
Well, ironically, for once you're in agreement with the "Michigan Undecideds"-- those Muslim voters in the hotly contested contest in Michigan. (Muslims who won't vote for Harris because of her strong pro-Israel comments).
They won't vote Democratic (or they will instead vote for a third party candidate) thus helping to elect Trump!!!
Many would call this an example of "The Law of Unintended Consequences".
I wonder what their excuses are going to be.
IIRC correctly, they blamed on The Jews.
Expected. The antisemites blamed the Jews.
As I said elsewhere, that's a good start.
Good move, depending on how much she sheds her "Squad" mentality.
I've already been criticized for that as being a help to elect Trump. The point is that my opinion means nothing as it is an entirely hypothetical situation - I'm not an American so I'm not authorized to vote in an American election, so I'm neither helping nor hindering who gets elected.
Being antisemitic has its consequences. For example, the student protesters who supported Hamas, should their identities become known, just might have a tough time finding a place where they can get a job. No matter how stellar their resumes may be, the quality of "ignorance" might precede their job interview.
I don't disagree with any of the points above and an additional point is money.
Our next DoD budget request may near $1 trillion as we prepare for China. The national debt will likely exceed $1 trillion next year. Over the last 2 1/2 years, we've provided $175 billion to the Ukraine and around $23 billion in military aid and increased US military operations around Israel (mostly naval operations).
Whoever wins next month, affordability will be an ongoing issue.
True.
(Unless, of course, the next president might just do what previous presidents have done: totally blame the other party for the National Debt.... and keep printing money!
).
Because
The United States and Israel have signed multiple bilateral defense cooperation agreements , to include: a Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (1952); a General Security of Information Agreement (1982); a Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (1991); and a Status of Forces Agreement (1994).
U.S. Security Cooperation with Israel - United States Department of State
Read the documents at the link - it explains the relationship between U.S. and ISrael very clearly