Israeli and Zionist influence in the USA is a purposeful choice of the American government. It allows the American government to circumvent many domestic and international laws by allowing Israeli firms to do the spying and dirty work for them. Israel is essentially a rogue state that is entirely controlled by the American intelligence apparatus (and therefore, American capital). This has created a feedback loop of constantly reinforcing settler colonialism and American economic extraction of the Middle East. If America withdrew support to Israel, this feedback loop would cease and Israel would be greatly diminished or completely collapse.

Saying Israel controls America is simply wrong, stop saying this. I will remove your post. ✌️

edit: altered title for clarification and to avoid nonsensical semantic arguments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Erika3sis@hexbear.net 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wonder how this compares to the UK and France, given that they also have hundreds of nuclear weapons.

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The UK and France are also sovereign states. They're not American puppets, and any analysis that they are is fundamentally unserious.

[–] Erika3sis@hexbear.net 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well, I was just thinking about how people are saying that it's reductive to say that one country strictly controls another, but at the same time it feels reductive to me to act like having nuclear weapons grants a country complete, supreme, perfect, and total sovereignty over itself. But you aren't saying that, anyways: you're saying that (intelligent actors within) both the Zionist entity and Seppoland can and do influence each other and can be pushed by the other to do things that go against their own interests, despite both polities being nuclear states.

Now your analysis of mutual influence to me seems absolutely correct, but I still think it raises the question of what the limits of nuclear weapons are when it comes to guaranteeing national sovereignty, and what the mechanisms of influence tend to be between two nuclear states. Because puppets or not, it still feels fair to say that the Zionist entity, UK, and France are all below Seppoland in the "pecking order", right? When painting in broad strokes, at least. So I figured it might be useful to compare and contrast these four polities' relationships to each other, basically. That this might be a way to land on a more holistic and accurate understanding of the dynamics at play.

[–] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 11 points 1 week ago

Because puppets or not, it still feels fair to say that the Zionist entity, UK, and France are all below Seppoland in the "pecking order", right?

Absolutely. I think you bring up great points and it's an interesting discussion to have. I agree 100% that just having nuclear weapons doesn't automatically grant perfect sovereignty. Nothing does that. I'm only saying that puppet states don't develop their own nuclear weapons.

But you aren't saying that, anyways: you're saying that (intelligent actors within) both the Zionist entity and Seppoland can and do influence each other and can be pushed by the other to do things that go against their own interests, despite both polities being nuclear states.

Yes, basically this. And of course the power balance there skews towards the US (how could it not).

[–] Le_Wokisme@hexbear.net 5 points 1 week ago

airstrip one, but of course they do plenty of things on their own for their own reasons.