Another possible explanation: Israel is a leading spyware manufacturer (e.g. Pegasus). They are probably involved in 'sensitive' eavesdropping operations world-wide, and quite likely, have data that would scare the world's leaders to even think not supporting Israel.
Isn't that found out that the "alternative" Signal client US Government officials are unofficially using is "backing-up" messages to company's server (probably in Israel).
I get this point, but also we shouldn't confuse "the jews people" with the current government of israel.
I don't believe for a second that the common jews people want to influence other countries or do anythind "bad".
But at the same time can believe that the current government of israel, that has some extremist parties inside, can try to influence foreign policy in many ways, potentially even extreme ways.
The United States has had this relationship with Israel for how long? Trying to tie the relationship to Epstein or throwing out random 'I'm just asking questions' isn't legitimate and is purely just a smear attempt. The USA and Israel have a long and historic relationship no need for conspiracy theories that vear really close to anti-semitic tropes. Funny how these baseless, historically disproven (did Epstein/Telegram go back in time and create the US/Israel relationship?) unserious smear attempts are 'legitimate' discussion when it comes to Israel, but not really any other discussion. This is no different than the disgusting BS pushing Israel somehow is responsible for Charlie Kirk.
“Never believe that antisemites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The antisemite has the right to play. They even like to play with discourse, for by giving ridiculous reasons they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutor. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert.”
Ok I think we were talking about different things. I was referring to just the current conflict with gaza, without knowing any of the other things you just mentioned.
I'm not contraddicting anything you said, but at the same time I just want to point out that picking always "one side" without evaluating the facts each time is a dangerous position.
This population has been unfairly persecuted for a long time and it has been unfairly accused of many things, but this doesn't make what IDF is doing any more humane
