• AttackBunny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      $$$$$$

      How are the defense contractors, and politicians going to get PAID if we aren’t constantly at war somewhere.

      • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You don't maintain the trillion dollar funding of a war machine by avoiding conflict now do you? That would be silly…

    • masquenox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Israel is a US client state - and it's obvious to the US that Israel is not as capable of dealing with the situation as they had hoped.

    • Bipta@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Israel is surrounded by enemies looking to take advantage of a moment of Israeli vulnerability. Simply moving aircraft carriers gives those enemies pause.

      Getting involved in this way prevents conflicts from spiraling.

        • Bipta@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You're not at all wrong my friend. The US should have moved the carriers there, but they should not have allowed this situation to develop as it has in the first place.

    • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it's presumably cheaper to park an aircraft carrier in the area than to take the economic impact at home that an escalation would lead to (due to rising oil prices etc.)