• lutillian@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    There’s no congressional approval needed as he is driven by treaty to provide arms, if anything he is compelled by Congress to send arms as long as Israel is at war as a US ally due to NATO.

    He’s trying to make the argument that Israel committing genocide with those arms is reason to withdraw support, unfortunately the US government moves at a glacial pace on it’s best day to the point that the US military is actually somehow faster. Given the number of Democrats that do support Israel, its entirely realistic that he could get successfully impeached if he failed to comply.

    Anyway… Thanks for the civil debate but work is starting so I need to go, I’ll read your next message bit I probably won’t have time to reply.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      This is getting circular and I have better things to do with my day. Let’s just agree to disagree.

      • lutillian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Cool, sounds good to me. Thanks again, I was finding myself eagerly anticipating your responses because I was definitely learning some new things about why people dislike his handling of the Gaza genocides. You’ve made some really good points. I think he’s made a good enough case at this point that NATO is no longer applicable in the case of genocide. At least with to protect him from retaliation if he did command a stop of US support to a NATO ally.