One of the biggest downsides of a VPN; you share an exit node with lots of other people, only takes one bad actor to get your exit node ip banned
lutillian
joined 1 year ago
I wish I had been born in Denmark or Norway - at least their social democratic safety nets would allow my community to thrive as the world burns around us
I feel this in my soul.
Yes. That's a question that has been raised by the US department of state that we might see an answer to in our life times of we're lucky.
I was mostly using unverified in lacking sources and people not going through and verifying their sources before just blindly believing them. Which seems to happen a lot.
People see Biden did something and don't look into why Biden did the thing he did then start calling him every because he did the thing he did without understanding why he did it. It's a vicious circular loop that I've seen with pretty much every president we've had since I can remember.
Biden seems to be pretty conscious about remaining within the bounds of law so there's a good chance there's generally some obscure treaty or other random grouping of legal documents that when all bundled together cause the reaction we see. I like to look up what those are because I find it interesting but I can guarantee the bulk of people in this thread do not.
We're not bound to sell weapons but we're bound to provide aid by a combination of Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (1952) which I can't find the text of from my phone... Need to wait till I'm near a computer to try again and Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (1991) which I linked elsewhere in the thread.
https://www.dsca.mil/programs/excess-defense-articles-eda Does explicitly allow the sale of arms to a list of nations from my understanding. This is a huge rabbit hole of laws and then exceptions to laws.
whether I personally agree any of this is right is a different story here
The ways to remedy a bilateral defense agreement depending on the actual agreement (I'm having trouble finding any of the us-isreal ones... So I'm just making assumptions here) usually boil down to supplying military aid or providing military defense.
Essentially the us must deploy supplies or a defense force. I'll keep digging for the actual text of one of these treaties but it might take a bit because the US state departments site is actually just really badly organized.
Summary of our obligations from the state department https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel/
The two that apply here are that arms can be dispersed with only congressional notification and that we're have multiple bilateral defense agreements with them.
Hamas issued an attack on Israel which triggered the bilateral defense agreements and one way to remedy would be to deploy supplies to the region with congressional notification.
Just imagine the damage to the region if we took bilateral defense to it's logical conclusion and dispatched actual military aid.
This is not Biden "going around Congress". This is Congress explicitly granting permission in advance to do it as long as they are notified.
(Worth noting I've never looked this deeply into this before so I'm learning about this clown fiesta as well. It goes pretty deep...)
That's only a subsection of our obligations. Two paragraphs up are what I was actually talking about. We have multiple bilateral defense agreements with them which essentially boils down to an attack on me must me treated as an attack on you.
Ah you are correct. They are a non-nato ally as they are out of geographical scope.
This world be applicable though.
It's the NATO agreement. https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/stock_publications/20120822_nato_treaty_en_light_2009.pdf
Article 5 is the one that got invoked by the Hamas attack
As stated in another thread, at this point Biden has done enough to cover against any legal retaliation however, and 100% command a withdrawal of US support as Israel has actually been using the supplies to commit war crimes
The best way to think of it is that the presidents power is roughly bellcurved relative to how much Congress is in alignment with them. If Congress is completely out of alignment with them they have very little power because congress can pass a vote on what he vetos or issue a stop on any executive action he takes. If Congress is slightly in alignment or out of alignment he becomes able to singlehandedly stop laws and executive actions aren't likely to get overruled and will have up go under judicial review. If Congress is completely in alignment with him, he doesn't need to use his veto powers or executive actions and if he does they likely won't be contested anyway but we're generally better off with Congress passing a law.
view more: next ›
Red Hat 4, father say me down on one of his Frankenstein computers built out of his trash heap in our basement and told me to have fun. I found tux racing konquest and played the shit out of them