A top aide to Vice President Harris said Thursday that the Democratic presidential nominee does not support an arms embargo on Israel, after the Uncommitted National Movement suggested she was open to discussing a total ban on weapons deliveries from the U.S.

Leaders of the Uncommitted National Movement, born out of opposition toward President Biden’s policy toward Israel, said Harris showed an openness to a meeting to discuss an arms embargo on Israel following a brief exchange with the group’s founders during her Wednesday campaign rally in Detroit.

However, Phil Gordon, Harris’s national security adviser, reiterated her opposition to an arms embargo in a Thursday post on the social platform X.

“@VP has been clear: she will always ensure Israel is able to defend itself against Iran and Iran-backed terrorist groups. She does not support an arms embargo on Israel. She will continue to work to protect civilians in Gaza and to uphold international humanitarian law,” he wrote.

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wouldn’t matter. As a matter of policy the US is always going to honor its defense commitments to Israel.

    What Israel is doing in Gaza stopped being “defense” a long time ago.

    • Codex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      What Isreal is doing in Gaza is inexcusable, particularly doing it with our guns.

      But the above poster is right, the US would never drop them. Isreal is too important to the US MIC for maintaining control in the middle east. If we abandoned Isreal, neighboring countries would (with good justification) most likely ally to invade them, led by Iran. Then the US has to deal with an allied ME bloc, possibly backed by Russia, China, or both.

      Really, the US is pouring money and arms into its own “defense” via Isreal as proxy. We should step in to stop them being genocidal, but I think the worry is that we’d just stir up a bigger shitstorm if we tried to actually deploy.

      Not that it’s going to matter soon since Iran ramping up aggression will “force” the US to step in.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Israel is not important whatsoever. If anything we currently have to subdue Egypt and provide Saudi Arabia with nukes just to appease israel.

      • anticurrent@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        a.k.a Israel is the keystone of US imperialism. but so Called American “leftists” are fine with their own imperialism, otherwise they will loose all other privileges over the rest of the world.

    • MagicShel@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Their current actions have crossed the line, I would agree. That doesn’t mean we would leave them without defense against future attacks. It’s all a bunch of fucking nuance where it seems like just do the right fucking thing would be easy but it turns out not because without US support Israel would get wiped off the map and we don’t want that for both moral and geopolitical reasons. It’s a fucking mess.

      (Edit: just skip this and read Codex’s response. Similar idea, but it’s better in every way and with 100% less fucking swearing.)

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Their current actions have crossed the line, I would agree. That doesn’t mean we would leave them without defense against future attacks.

        They have nukes, ffs. They’re plenty defended, and they don’t need us enabling Netanyahu’s genocide in order to continue defending themselves.