You still haven’t been able to back up your claim that the USA is putting the breaks on it’s aid of Isreal because of the genocide. All you’ve done is point to the US going “we’d like it if you slowed down on the genocide, but we’ll 100 support you if you don’t” and tried to equivocate that as being the same, when it really isn’t.
I said pumping the breaks. There’s still legitimate concern for the removal of Hamas as the acting government of Gaza. Neither Hamas, nor the Netantahu backed Israeli government want a 2 state solution, however this remains the US states policy. Whoever can broker a deal that affirms a 2 state solution here will hopefully produce meaningful change towards this conflict.
US aid is conditional to congressional support. Currently there’s debate on the issue at hand. Doesn’t remove the impact humanitarian aid has provided in the region. The 2 state solution has always been the desired solution here in the states. That position has been unwavering.
No, but if you’d like to make that conclusion, it’s well within your right to do so. This is why I support our democratic process and the debate it garnishes!
The United States official policy is for a 2 state solution, I’m not sure how you can see it any other way. Feel free to present your arguments though!
I’m glad I could present you with thoughtful alternatives to your beliefs. It’s important for civil discourse. This has been a largely productive and positive discussion, thank you for your input and civility!
You still haven’t been able to back up your claim that the USA is putting the breaks on it’s aid of Isreal because of the genocide. All you’ve done is point to the US going “we’d like it if you slowed down on the genocide, but we’ll 100 support you if you don’t” and tried to equivocate that as being the same, when it really isn’t.
I said pumping the breaks. There’s still legitimate concern for the removal of Hamas as the acting government of Gaza. Neither Hamas, nor the Netantahu backed Israeli government want a 2 state solution, however this remains the US states policy. Whoever can broker a deal that affirms a 2 state solution here will hopefully produce meaningful change towards this conflict.
Doesn’t change anything about my point.
Incorrect. And you don’t see the USA sending endless, unconditional, military aid to Palestine so they can remove the Israeli government.
Hamas explicitly calls for a 2 state solution you lying ghoul.
Not true, not until the US recognises the state of Palestine.
Going to be pretty hard to do while Isreal and the USA are committed to genocide.
US aid is conditional to congressional support. Currently there’s debate on the issue at hand. Doesn’t remove the impact humanitarian aid has provided in the region. The 2 state solution has always been the desired solution here in the states. That position has been unwavering.
So you lied and you admit it.
You’ve already been told that the USA doesn’t hold the two state solution and why.
No, but if you’d like to make that conclusion, it’s well within your right to do so. This is why I support our democratic process and the debate it garnishes!
The United States official policy is for a 2 state solution, I’m not sure how you can see it any other way. Feel free to present your arguments though!
I have, you ignored them and reasserted your thesis
I’m glad I could present you with thoughtful alternatives to your beliefs. It’s important for civil discourse. This has been a largely productive and positive discussion, thank you for your input and civility!