Is Biden's "Don't" foreign policy deterring terrorist groups and Iran?

[Dill]

(04-14-2024, 05:48 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: They were going to create a bomb whether there was a deal in place or not. I'm not sure why you dismiss their history of not being cooperative, yet history is important when it comes to Israel. 

How do you "know" this, and how could they have developed a bomb, given the invasive monitoring? Until at least 2018, it was the consensus of our and British intel that they were not interested in getting a bomb.  What they wanted was a functioning economy, which Obama understood would strengthen the middle class opposing the theocratic hard liners.  What history of not being cooperative are you referring to? 

(04-14-2024, 05:48 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm aware of how the money is being monitored and setup. but think about it, now the money they were using for that is freed to use for "other discretionary things". Don't pretend otherwise. If CC debts are eating up half of your money, and suddenly you don't have to worry about it for several years, that means half you money is open for you to use how ever you desire. Doesn't take a genius to figure that out. 

Nor is genius required to figure out they cannot shift costs anywhere if the funds are still frozen, as I said. So Biden's release of 6 billion could not possibly have helped fund Hamas, as you thought.  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/12/world/middleeast/us-qatar-iran-prisoner-deal.html

(04-14-2024, 05:48 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Pretty sure most of the other "powerful" Arab countries have already signed peace deals with Israel. The P's have had many years to come to the table with "powerful" backing yet make demands they know Israel won't agree, but Israel did give concessions a few times yet P's still rejected. I don't think the P's are interested in the kind of Peace you want them to be interested in. So yes, it's a good thing to bring them to the table on their knees and realize that they aren't going to get all that they want. Maybe it's that outside interference that keeps causing problems with the deals.

So in your eyes, none of these other things matter as much as the P's dispossession? 

Egypt would count as a "powerful" Arab country, Morocco, Tunisia, Bahrain, Sudan, Jordan, Oman and the UAE not so much. Egypt and Jordan are separate from the Abraham Accords. In many ways we are footing the bill for these agreements. E.g. two billion a year to Egypt since 1980. Sudan was enticed to agree by a billion+ down payment and removal from our list of "terrorist" states.  Despite their governments, populations of those countries have never been down with peace at the expense of Palestinian rights. All these peace agreements are rather precarious now, because of the Gaza war. 

Thought we had gone over some of this history before. After Palestinians came to the table and granted Israel's right to exist, Netanyahu and a series of right wing governments reneged on the deal and continued settlements on the West Bank. They have constantly moved the goalposts as soon as Palestinians have agreed to terms. You don't seem to think military rule over millions of non-Israelis, while incrementally appropriating their land, is any kind of problem. Do you think Palestinians should not have equal human rights? 

If someone bulldozed your home because of what someone else's kid down the block did, would you need "outside interference" to motivate resistance? I don't understand why US citizens are so comfortable with violent seizure of others' property, enforced by military violence, much of it paid for by the US.

Palestinian dispossession matters because it is the primary cause of the current conflict, which may embroil us with a war with Iran. It also matters because we are enabling the theft and oppression.