logoalt Hacker News

vel0cityyesterday at 8:24 PM1 replyview on HN

Its not US servicemembers pulling the trigger, its not US commanders deciding on targets, its not the POTUS starting the war. Pretty radically different things in my book.

How many US servicemembers were injured or killed in the US's apparent major war with Gaza?

We've spent ~$20B in grants for weapons procurement on Israel's behalf over several years, with a lot of that being defensive missile systems. I'm not a fan of us spending so much of our money on another country's military, especially when we hear over and over how we can't afford to feed kids or provide transportation to our people. But, we've spent over double than that so far in Iran in less than two months, and that's ignoring the many billions it'll cost to fix things that were destroyed so far. We're looking at the actual US cost of this war potentially reaching one trillion dollars.

Its a scale that's so radically different. And also, one was in support of a country who we have defense agreements with who was attacked, and another was us deciding to go bomb a country seemingly unprovoked.

Who is spreading whataboutism again?


Replies

wredcolltoday at 5:04 AM

I don't know if this is a failure of the bandwidth level of an internet forum message or a nuance thing, but like, you can both wish democrats sent less money to israel (for a whole bunch of reasons) while also acknowledging that this behaviour is preferable to the demonstrated alternative of republican presidents constantly trying to invade middle eastern countries.

Like, if you want less american money (and lives) being spent bombing the middle east, the most rational approach is to vote for a democrat majority/president and then primary anyone who still tries to buy bombs or whatever.

The alternative approach of letting a republican get elected is demonstrably worse.