Epic Fail

[Ransom]

The text you cited is clearly, and on its face, much more comprehensive than mere technology sharing.

That's nice. Where does it authorize Netanyahu to command U.S. troops?

 

[Ekklesian]

That's nice. Where does it authorize Netanyahu to command U.S. troops?

Who said it would?

 

[Ransom]

Who said it would?

Chuck Baldwin, apparently. And your reply to what I posted was still beside the point.

 

[Bruh]

So you're saying that Israel's head of government wrote to the American government to negotiate a defence deal?

Nefarious! What does he think his job is, anyway?

In the letter, Netanyahu praised a proposed congressional resolution that would gradually reduce direct U.S. military assistance and replace it with expanded joint defense cooperation, co-development, co-production, and mutual investment in areas such as missile defense, artificial intelligence, unmanned systems, cybersecurity, and next-generation military plattorms.

While Netanyahu explicitly referred to the initiative as

"my plan," Israel supporters will still call Netanyahu's control over the United States a "conspiracy."

 

[Ransom]

While Netanyahu explicitly referred to the initiative as

"my plan," Israel supporters will still call Netanyahu's control over the United States a "conspiracy."

So he has a plan for cooperation. So what?

I'm not calling it a conspiracy. Netanyahu is Israel's chief executive and head of government. It's his job to negotiate agreements with other countries.

 

[Bruh]

So he has a plan for cooperation. So what?

I'm not calling it a conspiracy. Netanyahu is Israel's chief executive and head of government. It's his job to negotiate agreements with other countries.

And we give him everything he ask for even when it doesn’t benefit America

 

[Ransom]

And we give him everything he ask for even when it doesn’t benefit America

And of course, no examples given.

 

[Bruh]

And of course, no examples given.

We give them almost 4 billion a year and when they ask for more we give it to them.

 

[Ransom]

And of course, no examples given.

As I was saying.

 

[illinoisguy]

This web site has the complete text (not just a summary) of Section 224:

Section 224: The National Defense Authorization Act FY 2027 — A New Policy

As political pressure builds to reduce U.S. military assistance to Israel, Section 224 provides the framework for continuing - and expanding - U.S.-Israel military ties by entrenching Israeli technology within the U.S. defense supply chain in a way that would shield it from the annual appropriations

www.anewpolicy.org

(a) (1) Identifying jointly developed or Israeli-origin technologies with operational utility for potential integration into United States systems and programs of record;
(a)(2) Ensuring collaborative research initiatives involving government, private sector, and academic institutions in the United States and Israel, is done in a manner that protects sensitive technology and information and the national security interests of the United States and Israel;
(a)(3) Facilitating the transition of technologies from research and development into procurement and acquisition pathways;
(a)(4) Establishing frameworks for joint ventures, licensing agreements, and United States-based co-production or manufacturing partnerships with Israeli industry;
(a)(5) Coordinating with relevant Department of Defense components, including the Irregular Warfare Technical Support Directorate, capability development and innovation divisions, the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, the Defense Innovation Unit, the United States-Israel Operations Technology Working Group, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Missile Defense Agency, the United States Space Command, the military departments, and other Department of Defense entities, as appropriate, to align efforts and avoid duplication;
(a)(6) Promoting joint training exercises and information-sharing mechanisms to enhance operational readiness to deploy jointly developed technologies;
Section (b) COOPERATIVE EFFORTS.—The synchronized cooperative efforts under subsection (a) may be carried out through the following domains:
(1) Counter-Unmanned Systems including aerial, maritime, and ground platforms.
(2) Anti-tunneling and subterranean threats.
(3) Missile and air defense technologies.
(4) Artificial intelligence, quantum, machine learning, and autonomous systems.
(5) Directed energy and advanced sensing.
(6) Cyber defense, electronic warfare, and digital resilience.
(7) Biotechnology, biomanufacturing, and medical defense.
(8) Network integration, data fusion, and contested logistics.
(9) Defense industrial base cooperation, manufacturing, and co-production.
(10) Other emerging technologies as jointly agreed by the United States and Israel.

Okay, but what does all this mean?

"Deepening defense co-operation with Israel, particularly in the field of emerging defense technologies, creates and expands risks to the U.S. military edge. This program would expose future areas of U.S. military advantage to a country that is known to maintain a robust technological espionage program and which has previously exported sensitive U.S. military technologies to adversaries including the People’s Republic of China — the very nation that the only existing US partnerships on AI/quantum military technologies work to counter. Furthermore, Israel is a leading exporter of offensive cyber tools that have been used to target U.S. citizens, including U.S. Government officials. . . .

"All countries with whom the U.S. has existing Congressionally authorized programs have ratified the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), an international treaty that prohibits the development, production, acquisition, transfer, and stockpiling of biological and toxin weapons. Israel, however, is one of only 10 countries around the world that has neither signed nor ratified the BWC. This program, if authorized, would be the U.S.’ first with a country that has refused to foreswear offensive biological weapons, and is widely suspected to have an active offensive biological weapons program. . . .

"A New Policy strongly opposes section 224 because the purpose of this section is to avoid the scrutiny and transparency afforded through the current grant assistance to Israel in favor of a mechanism designed to implant Israel’s defense and intelligence establishments into the most sensitive and basic levels of America’s own defense technology ecosystem. This approach exposes sensitive U.S. capabilities to counterintelligence risk, normalizes technologies developed in contexts of occupation and civilian harm, disadvantages U.S. defense companies ability to compete with Israeli competitors, deepens U.S. legal and reputational exposure without clear strategic necessity, and aims to hide continuing U.S. military support to Israel from Congressional and public transparency."

 

[Bruh]

The same Pentagon that is allowing the integration of the US military and IDF?

 

[Ransom]

Did Netanyahu order the Pentagon to be concerned about Israel spying on the U.S.?

 

[Ekklesian]

And of course, no examples given.

Trump is killing Iranians for them on two occassions within the span of a year.

 

[Ransom]

Trump is killing Iranians for them on two occassions within the span of a year.

And still no examples given, because I was talking to Bruh. Let him fight his own battles.