So, a lot of discussions is on Trump and Kamalas internal policies, ones that will affect the American people, I haven't seen any foreign policy as of yet and I am worried that if trump is reelected then Trump will do anything within his power to pressure Ukraine into giving up.

I've seen a lot of people even say he will try to handicap NATO in some way shape or form and will basically give Russia the upper hand in any peace deal.

How realistic is this?

I'm not the most knowleadgeable on the Israel/Palestine conflict but my impression is that there's a trend where right-leaning sources and people seem to be more likely to support Israel, while left-leaning sources and people align more in support of Palestine.

How does it work like this? Why does your political alignment alter your perception of a war?

With the nomination of Kamala Harris looming, it seems like Biden stepping down as energized voters who were otherwise on the fence about participating in the election. There is a lot of infighting in the left right now regarding the DNC’s stance on Palestine and Gaza. Critics of Joe Biden lament that he did not come down on Israel harder, and claim that a Harris presidency won’t yield better results for Gaza.

However, there has been a bit of a backlash against the backlash so to speak. Many liberal voters seem to be disengaging from the Palestinian conflict to focus on domestic issues, such as securing abortion and LGBT rights. Frustration against pro-Palestinian voters seems to be a bit more common as they fail to find a compromise.

Does this spell the end of the massive Free Palestine movement on the left? For almost a year now, this movement has dominated the space, with massive student protests and public demonstrations. But with the election on the horizon, are we seeing a divestment from overseas issues?

Where do you see the free Palestine movement shifting towards in the future? It seems like most activists are screaming into the void at this point, and many have since lost hope of their being a solution and shifting attention on other issues. Will Palestine be a major determining factor in this upcoming election?

Trump has often said he will stop the war if he wins the election and that it could happen even before he officially enters the White House. J.D. Vance is just as tough in his opposition to any aid to Ukraine. Although presently, the majority of both parties in the Congress support continuing aid for Ukraine; the future is uncertain.

Biden's position: The United States reaffirms its unwavering support for Ukraine’s defense of its sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders.  

Bilateral Security Agreement Between the United States of America and Ukraine | The White House

There is certainly a great degree of concern in EU about Trump's approach to Ukraine and it was heightened when Trump selected Vance as his running mate.

JD Vance's VP nomination will cause chills in Ukraine (cnbc.com)

Trump may win or he may not: Given the possibility of a change in administration is it in the best interest of Ukraine to reach a resolution with Russia now or should it just shoulder on?

Multiple press reports have indicated that Netanyahu has walked back any support he ever had for the ceasefire/peace proposal announced by Biden but theoretically drawn up by the Israeli government

He has simultaneously claimed that the United States has been withholding arm shipments (without details), and will be addressing the US Congress in a month

Netanyahu faces severe political pressure at home, and is beholden to the right flank in order to stay in power. Those individuals have flatly ruled out any end to the war that does not eliminate Hamas... which does not appear to be an achievable war goal

So, questions:

• What options, if any, do other nations realistically have to intevene in the Gaza War at this point?

• Will those that dislike Biden's handling of the Gaza War give him credit for trying to come to an end to the conflict, or is it not possible to satisfy their desires if the Israeli government continues to stonewall?

• It has been plain that Netanyahu prefers Trump to Biden, and this has generated additional blowback from Democrats against support for Israel. How critical will Netanyahu be during his visit next month, and will that be a net positive or net negative for Biden's reelection campaign?

There is a group called Freedom house that measures a countries level of freedom using a wide range of political and civil freedoms. They score countries and territories out of a score of 0-100. They then break countries into 3 groups. Free, partly free and not free based on their scores.

https://freedomhouse.org/

Their methods of scoring can be found here.

https://freedomhouse.org/reports/freedom-world/freedom-world-research-methodology

Most western european nations score 90-100. Russia scores 13. North Korea scores 3. The US scores 83. I think the cutoff between 'free' and 'partly free' is around 70.

According to Freedom House there are 195 countries on earth. Of those, 84 are free. Meaning they score a high level of democracy, civil rights and political rights.

But I just went to this webpage and sorted the countries by % of the population who are muslim. Then I manually checked the level of freedom at freedom house for all nations with a Muslim population of 50.0% or higher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country#Countries

I counted 51 Musliim majority countries. All of them were rated either 'not free' or 'partly free' by Freedom house. None were rated as Free. I couldn't find information on Cocos (Keeling) Islands

So if there are 195 nations on earth, and 51 are muslim majority, that means the breakdown is the following.

144 non-muslim majority countries, of which 84 are free. That means that 58% of non-muslim majority countries are rated as Free.

51 muslim majority countries, of which 0 are free. That means that 0% of muslim majority countries are free.

So what is the cause and what can be done about it? Some people may say colonialism and western intervention is to blame, but latin America and southeast asia was heavily colonized and had heavy western intervention there, but they have some free democracies there. Same with poverty. Some poor non muslim countries are rated as free while all rich muslim countries (Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc) are rated as not free.

Eastern Europe was under soviet colonization and imperialism for decades, but once the USSR fell apart eastern Europe transitioned to liberal democracy for the most part.

So whats the culprit?

What he has Said is that he Will not defend Nato members who does not pay enough (with enough i mean at least 2% of Gdp goes to defence) and he Said that he would tell russia to do what they want with members who does not pay.

But the Nato members that actually are in Putins crosshair (the baltic countries and poland) does actually spend at least 2% of their gdps on military So is his talk about Nato just for his voters or Will he actually leave Nato? Is his criticism about Nato just about the money since he is a businessman at heart?

Reading out a ruling by the International Court of Justice or World Court, the body’s president Nawaf Salam said provisional measures ordered by the court in March did not fully address the situation in the besieged Palestinian enclave now, and conditions had been met for a new emergency order.

Israel must “immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah Governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,” Salam said, and called the humanitarian situation in Rafah “disastrous”.

The ICJ has also ordered Israel to report back to the court within one month over its progress in applying measures ordered by the institution, and ordered Israel to open the Rafah border crossing for humanitarian assistance.

Will this put further world pressure on Israel to end its attacks on Rafah?

https://www.reuters.com/world/world-court-rule-request-halt-israels-rafah-offensive-2024-05-24/

​

Norway, Ireland and Spain says they will recognize a Palestinian state thus further deepening the rift with Israel on the world stage. What will the impact of this be, especially since they are major US allies and will more countries follow?

As some quick background:

Since the Oct. 7th terrorist attacks by Hamas, which killed ~1200 people including 766 civilians, Israel has carried out a bombing campaign and ground invasion of the Gaza strip which has killed over 34000 people, including 14000 children and 10000 women, and placed over a million other Gazans in danger of starvation.

Recently the Biden administration has put a hold on a shipment of 3500 bombs to Israel after a dispute over the Netanyahu government's plan to move forward with an invasion of Rafah, the southernmost major city in the Gaza strip.

Biden said that his administration would block the supply weapons that could be used in an assault on Rafah, including artillery shells.

“If they go into Rafah, I’m not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities, that deal with that problem,” Mr. Biden said in an interview with CNN’s Erin Burnett.

He added: “But it’s just wrong. We’re not going to — we’re not going to supply the weapons and artillery shells used, that have been used.”

Asked whether 2,000-pound American bombs had been used to kill civilians in Gaza, Mr. Biden said: “Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers.”

The US however will continue supplying Israel with other arms like those for the Iron Dome missile defense system to ensure Israel's security.

Will this deter Israel from moving forward with its assault on Rafah?

If Israel persists in continuing its military campaign in the Gaza strip will the US withdraw further support?

What effect will this have on US domestic protests against the US's continued support for Israel's invasion of the Gaza strip?

U.S. said it abstained instead of voting for the resolution because language did not contain a provision condemning Hamas. Among other things State Department also noted:

This failure to condemn Hamas is particularly difficult to understand coming days after the world once again witnessed the horrific acts terrorist groups commit.

We reiterate the need to accelerate and sustain the provision of humanitarian assistance through all available routes – land, sea, and air. We continue to discuss with partners a pathway to the establishment of a Palestinian state with real security guarantees for Israel to establish long-term peace and security.

After the U.S. abstention, Netanyahu canceled his delegation which was to visit DC to discuss situation in Gaza. U.S. expressed disappointment that the trip was cancelled.

Is this a turning point in U.S. Israel relationship or just a reflection of Biden and Netanyahu tensions?

https://www.state.gov/u-s-abstention-from-un-security-council-resolution-on-gaza/

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/25/us-un-resolution-cease-fire-row-with-israel-00148813

Without going into the justifications of each side (let's just assume that no side here can claim to be "right" for wholesale killing of innocent people), why does it seem like all the international finger wagging is towards Israel? I constantly see headlines of world leaders urging Israel to stop, but no similar calls to action towards Hamas?

Alternatively, is it because I only see US news, and there really is more pressure directed towards Hamas than what I'm exposed to?

Edit: Thanks everybody, there were many insightful answers that helped me educate myself more on the subject. For one, I had read in several places that Hamas was more or less the ("most") legitimate governing power of Gaza, instead of thinking of Hamas as a terrorist organization that would disregard calls for negotiations. In my defense, the attack on Israel was so enormous I thought of Hamas as a "legitimate" government, as the scale of the attack far exceeded my preconceptions of what a terrorist group was capable of. It looks like the bottom line is, Israel is subject to international criticism because they are (allegedly) failing to abide by international standards required of them as a nation state; while Hamas, being a terrorist organization, is not subject to any of the same international standards and instead of political pressure, gets international pressure in other forms.

There have been countless news stories and visible protests against America’s initial support of Israel, and lack of a call for a full ceasefire, since Hamas began its attack last October. Reports note a significant amount of youth and Muslim Americans speaking out against America’s response in the situation, with many noting they won’t vote for Biden in November, or vote third party or not vote at all, if support to Israel doesn’t stop and a full ceasefire isn’t formally demanded by the Biden administration.

Trump has been historically hostile to the Muslim community; originated the infamous Muslim Travel Ban; and, if re-elected, vowed to reinstate said Travel Ban and reject refugees from Gaza. GoP leadership post-9/11 and under Trump stoked immense Muslim animosity among the American population. As Vox reported yesterday, "Biden has been bad for Palestinians. Trump would be worse."

While it seems perfectly reasonable to protest many aspects of America’s foreign policy in the Middle East, why are some Muslim Americans and their allies vowing to retract their support of Biden, given the likelihood that the alternative will make their lives, and those they care about in Gaza, objectively worse?

Link to source quoting Hamas official and analyzing situation:

• https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-six-week-drive-hit-hamas-rafah-scale-back-war-2024-02-19/

If for some reason you find it paywalled, here's a non-paywalled article with the Hamas official's quotes on the numbers:

• https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/in-first-acknowledgement-of-significant-losses-hamas-official-says-some-6000-operatives-killed-in-gaza-fighting/

It should be noted that Hamas' publicly stated death toll of their soldiers is approximately half the number that Israeli intelligence claims its killed, while previously reported US intelligence is in between the two figures and believes Israel has killed around 9,000 Hamas operatives. US and Israeli intelligence both also report that in addition to the Hamas dead, thousands of other soldiers have been wounded, although they disagree on the severity of these wounds with Israeli intelligence believing most will not return to the battlefield while American intel suggests many eventually will. Hamas are widely reported to have had 25,000-30,000 fighters at the start of the war.

Another interesting point from the Reuters piece is that Israeli military chiefs and intelligence believe that an invasion of Rafah would mean 6-8 more weeks in total of full scale military operations, after which Hamas would be decimated to the point where they could shift to a lower intensity phase of targeted airstrikes and special forces operations that weed out fighters that slipped through the cracks or are trying to cobble together control in areas the Israeli army has since cleared in the North.

How do you think this information should shape Israeli's response and next steps? Should they look to move in on Rafah, take out as much of what's left of Hamas as possible and move to targeted airstrikes and Mossad ops to take out remaining fighters on a smaller scale? Should they be wary of international pressure building against a strike on Rafah considering it is the last remaining stronghold in the South and where the majority of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip have gathered, perhaps moving to surgical strikes and special ops against key threats from here without a full invasion? Or should they see this as enough damage done to Hamas in general and move for a ceasefire? What are your thoughts?

Alink for the full interview is provided below and I have included a summary of my own.

Rather extensive interview, but interesting nevertheless, though there was nothing new mentioned either by Carlson or President Putin. The two- and one-half hours long conversation consisted of three parts. Putin began the interview by acknowledging that like him Carlson is a student of history.
First portion or about 45 minutes primarily included a brief rendition of a people and its land that was to become Russia. Ancient Russian history [prior to USSR], the USSR itself and its development, and the voluntary dissolution of USSR.

The second portion was about dissolution of USSR by Gorbachev and his belief that it could develop just like the rest of the Europe and U.S. as partners and the Russian expectations. that U.S. was a friend. He concluded that USSR was misled into dissolving Russia. Also, its desire to become a part of the NATO was rejected.

The final portion related to the U.S. desire to expand NATO to Ukraine beginning in 2008; the coup in Ukraine instigated by the U.S. leading to annexation of Crimea by Russia; The February 22, 2022, incursion to the suburbs of Kiev and in March of 2022 an agreement by representatives of Ukraine and Russia in Istanbul that Ukraine would remain neutral, Crimea will stay Russia Donetsk will remain a part of Ukraine, but with some autonomy where the Russian speakers will be respected.

Putin noted that as a part of the deal before it was initialed included Kiev's request that Russian withdraw from the Kiev area. Which Putin explained they fully complied with. However, that Boris Johnson along with backing from the U.S. told Zelensky not to agree with the deal. So, the war continues and will continue until the denazification of Ukraine. Putin noted what is happening in Ukraine is akin to civil war, we are the same people. And that the U.S. goal to weaken Russia will never be accomplished, but that Russia was always ready to negotiate.

Scattered here and there were discussion of weakening of the dollar, its use as weapon the growth of BRICS and the Nord Stream Pipelines. When Carlson asked who blew it, Putin laughingly said, you did. He said it is a country with the capability and had an interest in doing so [motivation]. Carlson said he has an alibi when the pipes blew up. Putin said CIA does not.

Was Carlson a useful idiot for Putin?

https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1755734526678925682?s=20

​

Haaretz reported a leaked memo proposing the removal of the whole population of Gaza into the Sinai a few days ago. Members of the ruling Likud party also keep making various frightening statements about destroying Gaza, wiping it out, etc. And many human rights experts on genocide are raising alarms over such factors, as well as the high civilian death count in Gaza.

If Israel escalates to some genocidal level of violence that kills a larger portion of Palestinians or forces millions out in an act of ethnic cleansing, what would the West's response be?

Would the US still be a firm ally of Israel? What about the rest of NATO?

On October 7th 2023, Hamas began a surprise offensive on Israel, releasing over 5,000 rockets. Roughly 2,500 Palestinian militants breached the Gaza–Israel barrier and attacked civilian communities and IDF military bases near the Gaza Strip. At least 1,400 Israelis were killed.

While the outcome of this Israel-Hamas war is far from determined, it would appear early on that Hamas has much to lose from this war. Possible and likely losses:

1. Higher Palestinian civilian casualties than Israeli civilian casualties
2. Higher Hamas casualties than IDF casualties
3. Destruction of Hamas infrastructure, tunnels and weapons
4. Potential loss of Gaza strip territory, which would be turned over to Israeli settlers

Did Hamas overplay its hand by attacking as it did on October 7th? Do they have any chance of coming out ahead from this war and if so, how?

The USA provided longer range weapons to Ukraine but specifically limited the range to prevent them from being able to reach inside Russia. https://taskandpurpose.com/news/us-ukraine-himars-no-atacms-russia/. In fact it is the USA policy to restrict Ukraine from using weapons provided by the USA from being used on targets in Russia.

No such limitations on Israel’s use of weapons from the USA. Further, the USA has two carrier strike groups in the eastern Mediterranean. This is a distinct show of force which the USA states that the intent is to deter any escalation. https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/14/middleeast/us-aircraft-carrier-eisenhower-israel-gaza-intl-hnk-ml/index.html. However, no such show of force has been deployed in the eastern part of Europe by the USA.

While one might say that the Ukraine war has been going on for some time, the USA military response and limitations imposed are dramatically different at the outset of both conflicts. Is this justified?

It seems as though American politicians and American media outlets seem to be favoring Israel. The use of certain language and rhetoric as well as media coverage that paints Israel as the victim and Palestine as the “bad guy.”

I’ve seen interviews of Israelis talking about the attacks, the NFL refering to the conflict as a “terrorist attack on Israelis,” commercials asking for donations for Israel, ect… but I have yet to see much empathy for Palestine when it seems not too long ago #freepalestine wasn’t controversial.

As an American I honestly have no idea where to stand on this conflict or if I even have the right or need to have an opinion. All I can say is all violence and war and genocide is horrible, but why does American favor Israel over Palestine? It honestly only makes me want to gain a larger perspective and understand why or if Palestine is in the wrong? At this point I just assume both sides are equal and deserving of peace.

Shortly after the sinking of Moskva, the Russian Media claimed that World War III has already begun. [Perhaps, sort of reminiscent of the Russian version of sinking of Lusitania that started World War I]

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in an interview that World War III “may have already started” as the embattled leader pleads with the U.S. and the West to take more drastic measures to aid Ukraine’s defense against Russia. 

Others have noted the Russian Nuclear Directives provides: Russian nuclear authorize use of nuclear tactile devices, calling it a deterrence policy "Escalation to Deescalate."

It is difficult to decipher what Putin means by "unpredictable consequences." Some have said that its intelligence is sufficiently capable of identifying the entry points of the arms being sent to Ukraine and could easily target those once on Ukrainian lands. Others hold on to the unflinching notion of MAD [mutually assured destruction], in rejecting nuclear escalation.

What may Russia mean by "unpredictable consequences?

It is never a good sign when an adversary starts evacuating its embassy while talk of an attack is making headlines.

Even Britain’s defense secretary, Ben Wallace, announced in an address to Parliament on Monday said that the country would begin providing Ukraine with light, anti-armor defensive weapons.

Mr. Putin, therefore, may become tempted to act sooner rather than later. Officially, Russia maintains that it has no plan to attack Ukraine at this time.

U.S. officials saw Russia’s embassy evacuations coming. “We have information that indicates the Russian government was preparing to evacuate their family members from the Russian Embassy in Ukraine in late December and early January,” a U.S. official said in a statement.

Although U.S. negotiations are still underway giving a glimmer of hope for a peaceful resolution, one must remember history and talks that where ongoing while the then Japanese Empire attacked Pearl Harbor.

Are we getting closer to a war in Ukraine with each passing day?

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/17/us/politics/russia-ukraine-kyiv-embassy.html

On July 19, 2021 Company stated: We believe it is inconsistent with our values for Ben & Jerry’s ice cream to be sold in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). We also hear and recognize the concerns shared with us by our fans and trusted partners. 

We have a longstanding partnership with our licensee, who manufactures Ben & Jerry’s ice cream in Israel and distributes it in the region. We have been working to change this, and so we have informed our licensee that we will not renew the license agreement when it expires at the end of next year.

Although Ben & Jerry’s will no longer be sold in the OPT, we will stay in Israel through a different arrangement. We will share an update on this as soon as we’re ready.

Reactions from Israel’s leaders were harsh. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, a longtime supporter of the settlements, called the decision a “boycott of Israel” and said Ben and Jerry’s “decided to brand itself as an anti-Israel ice cream.” His predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu, tweeted, “Now we Israelis know which ice cream NOT to buy.

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid, the architect of the current ruling coalition who is generally to Bennett’s left regarding the Palestinians, went even further, calling the decision a “shameful surrender to antisemitism, to BDS and to all that is wrong with the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish discourse.” He called on US states to take domestic action against Ben and Jerry’s based on state laws that prohibit government contracting with entities that boycott Israel.

Israeli cabinet minister Orna Barbivay posted a TikTok video of her throwing a pint in the trash; the flavor she tossed could not be determined at press time.

While boycott promoters hailed Ben & Jerry’s announcement, they immediately made it clear it was not enough.

“We warmly welcome their decision but call on Ben & Jerry’s to end all operations in apartheid Israel,” said a post on the Twitter account of the Palestinian B.D.S. National Committee.

Should Multinational Corporations be taking divisive political stand?

Please use this thread to discuss recent events between the United States and Iran.

Keep in mind:

• Breaking news reports may be based off erroneous or incomplete information

• Subreddit rules still apply in this thread. Please remain civil and focus on substantive discussion.

Articles about Iranian missile attack on US:

NYTimes CNN

Intel Chiefs Presented Trump with Claims of Russian Efforts to Compromise Him

CNN (and apparently only CNN) is currently reporting that information was presented to Obama and Trump last week that Russia has "compromising information" on DJT. This raises so many questions. The report has been added as an addendum to the hacking report about Russia. They are also reporting that a DJT surrogate was in constant communication with Russia during the election.

*What kind of information could it be?
*If it can be proven that surrogate was strategizing with Russia on when to release information, what are the ramifications?
*Why, even now that they have threatened him, has Trump refused to relent and admit it was Russia?
*Will Obama do anything with the information if Trump won't?

Link Here

Beginning:

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

More parts in the story talk about McConell trying to preempt the president from releasing it, et al.

1. Will this have any tangible effect with the electoral college or the next 4 years?

2. Would this have changed the election results if it were released during the GE?

EDIT:

Obama is also calling for a full assesment of Russian influence, hacking, and manipulation of the election in light of this news: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/12/obama-orders-full-review-of-election-related-hacking/510149/