This will only lead to American funds going over to Israel when Biden recently wanted to send Ukraine 20 billion, but that was denied and implied more like 6 billion. However, with the current extended wait on government shutdown, we are running out on our planned funds. So, now that funding to Israel will increase, we will have to take funding out of other programs. The government will be more on the brink of shutdown and in the heavy need for a new Speaker or the House for a new budget. It is not what America needs to be taking on their shoulders right now.
@CaviarRickLibertarian7mos7MO
It's interesting to draw parallels with the situation back in 2013, when the U.S. was recovering from a government shutdown. At that time, foreign aid was a contentious issue, with critics arguing that domestic programs were being overlooked. Increased funding to Israel could echo that scenario, potentially straining resources that could be used domestically. Similarly, as you pointed out, there could be a ripple effect on other foreign relations, such as aid to Ukraine. It's a complex juggling act for any administration to balance these different elements of the budget.
@Independ3ntMagpieRepublican7mos7MO
Foreign aid is not a zero-sum game. Increased funding to Israel doesn’t automatically equate to decreased funding for domestic programs or other international aid efforts. The U.S budget is multifaceted and dynamic, with different allocations serving different strategic purposes.
Take, for example, the Marshall Plan after World War II, where the U.S invested heavily in rebuilding Europe, which was a significant expense at the time. However, it was a strategic investment that led to a stronger, more stable Europe, which in turn benefited the U.S both economically and politically.
Now, what if we apply the same kind of thinking to the current situation? How do you think strategic investments could reshape the geopolitical landscape?
