Israeli Scheme?

[User]

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

If the US does this, would Israel not be privy to everything NATO knows? The answer is 'yes'. Especially since the USA is essentially NATO.

 

You just went from talking about joining NATO. I asked you what the law said about JOINING NATO. 

Now you pivot yet again to something else, talking about being privy to everything NATO knows. 

So... what does the law say about Israel getting to know everything NATO knows? Where are you getting this from?

What does any of this have to do with anything regarding your other assertions?

 

[Nationalist]

15 minutes ago, User said:

You just went from talking about joining NATO. I asked you what the law said about JOINING NATO. 

Now you pivot yet again to something else, talking about being privy to everything NATO knows. 

So... what does the law say about Israel getting to know everything NATO knows? Where are you getting this from?

What does any of this have to do with anything regarding your other assertions?

 

Huh...

Are you trying to say that you don't see the implications of all this?

[User]

11 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Huh...

Are you trying to say that you don't see the implications of all this?

What implications am I supposed to see?

Once again, the pattern of this discussion goes like this:

-> You make a baseless assertion or ask loaded questions

-> I ask you to back it up, show me where the law says anything like that

-> You make another baseless assertion or ask more loaded questions

-> I ask you to back it up, show me where the law says anything like that

Here we are again... you ask me a question about implications. So, what implications? What does the law say that you are talking about?

[Nationalist]

40 minutes ago, User said:

What implications am I supposed to see?

Once again, the pattern of this discussion goes like this:

-> You make a baseless assertion or ask loaded questions

-> I ask you to back it up, show me where the law says anything like that

-> You make another baseless assertion or ask more loaded questions

-> I ask you to back it up, show me where the law says anything like that

Here we are again... you ask me a question about implications. So, what implications? What does the law say that you are talking about?

Look...you think what you wanna think, and I'll do the same. 

I do not think Israel can be trusted. 

[User]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Look...you think what you wanna think, and I'll do the same. 

I do not think Israel can be trusted. 

LOL, we are not talking about our favorite ice cream flavors, you keep making assertions based on facts that are either true or not true, but then you refuse to back them up. 

 

[Nationalist]

12 hours ago, User said:

LOL, we are not talking about our favorite ice cream flavors, you keep making assertions based on facts that are either true or not true, but then you refuse to back them up. 

 

Back what up? Im not playing this pedantic game with you. IMO, Israel is completely untrustworthy and this unification idea is only gonna spell bad news for everyone concerned.

[User]

2 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Back what up? Im not playing this pedantic game with you. IMO, Israel is completely untrustworthy and this unification idea is only gonna spell bad news for everyone concerned.

Yet you are playing games. You keep making baseless assertions then running away from my questions asking you to back them up. 

[Nationalist]

20 hours ago, User said:

Yet you are playing games. You keep making baseless assertions then running away from my questions asking you to back them up. 

Baseless? The Babylonians trusted them...and had to expel them. The Kazars trusted them...and had to expel them. The Russians trusted them...and had to expel them.

History kind of suggests these are not trustworthy people. 

[User]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Baseless? The Babylonians trusted them...and had to expel them. The Kazars trusted them...and had to expel them. The Russians trusted them...and had to expel them.

History kind of suggests these are not trustworthy people. 

Holy crap, now you have gone full anti-Semite. 

[CdnFox]

On 6/12/2026 at 7:52 AM, Nationalist said:

My wife LOVES watching The Young Turks. I find it...a bit tiresome. I prefer to atleast try to take a breather on the culture/political windowdressing sometimes. Anyway...

This I found both amusing and disturbing. 

I thought the Intel agencies already shared everything. Isn't that one of the arguments for supporting Israel?

This...if true...leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Somewhat like eating leftover matzah balls.

Thoughts?

America and Israel definitely do not share everything at the moment. They share a lot but definitely not everything

So I took the time to actually read the legislation that's been proposed and read some analysis pro and con with regards to it

As usual it would look like both sides are kind of overhyping things.

To be clear this wouldn't actually give the Israelis access to much in and of itself. But it would establish an appointed official specifically to facilitate providing access and doing joint ventures moving forward. So people are right when they say lay the groundwork or open up the possibility that in the future there would be more cooperation and integration.

However it doesn't require that and most of the areas are already areas where America and Israel share some information already. It seems mostly to make it easier to do joint ventures to cooperatively explore new technologies

Proponents say this will give Israel the ability to build its own advanced weapons without the us having to provide them. Opponents feel that this will be a permanent back door that Israel can use to improve its own military technology which can then be used to oppress others in the region

My feeling is that this is an effort to make it harder for future administrations to walk away from Israel entirely and ensure that Israel has continued us support even if a israel negative government were to be elected.

Some will say that's good, some will say that's bad. But I don't think it's handing America's technology Over to anyone selling out america to the Israelis.

So when people say it's harmless and just the way to facilitate things they're probably being a little disingenuous, and when they say that this is an integration or blending of american and is really military that's probably a gross overstatement as well

What is true is it does facilitate and make it easier for America to provide support to Israel and for Israel to be a little more independent of America militarily and whether or not that's a good thing would be a matter of discussion

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, User said:

Holy crap, now you have gone full anti-Semite. 

Not a fan of one of the ancient tribes.

 

[Nationalist]

23 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

America and Israel definitely do not share everything at the moment. They share a lot but definitely not everything

So I took the time to actually read the legislation that's been proposed and read some analysis pro and con with regards to it

As usual it would look like both sides are kind of overhyping things.

To be clear this wouldn't actually give the Israelis access to much in and of itself. But it would establish an appointed official specifically to facilitate providing access and doing joint ventures moving forward. So people are right when they say lay the groundwork or open up the possibility that in the future there would be more cooperation and integration.

However it doesn't require that and most of the areas are already areas where America and Israel share some information already. It seems mostly to make it easier to do joint ventures to cooperatively explore new technologies

Proponents say this will give Israel the ability to build its own advanced weapons without the us having to provide them. Opponents feel that this will be a permanent back door that Israel can use to improve its own military technology which can then be used to oppress others in the region

My feeling is that this is an effort to make it harder for future administrations to walk away from Israel entirely and ensure that Israel has continued us support even if a israel negative government were to be elected.

Some will say that's good, some will say that's bad. But I don't think it's handing America's technology Over to anyone selling out america to the Israelis.

So when people say it's harmless and just the way to facilitate things they're probably being a little disingenuous, and when they say that this is an integration or blending of american and is really military that's probably a gross overstatement as well

What is true is it does facilitate and make it easier for America to provide support to Israel and for Israel to be a little more independent of America militarily and whether or not that's a good thing would be a matter of discussion

Rather level headed.

Good.

23 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

America and Israel definitely do not share everything at the moment. They share a lot but definitely not everything

So I took the time to actually read the legislation that's been proposed and read some analysis pro and con with regards to it

As usual it would look like both sides are kind of overhyping things.

To be clear this wouldn't actually give the Israelis access to much in and of itself. But it would establish an appointed official specifically to facilitate providing access and doing joint ventures moving forward. So people are right when they say lay the groundwork or open up the possibility that in the future there would be more cooperation and integration.

However it doesn't require that and most of the areas are already areas where America and Israel share some information already. It seems mostly to make it easier to do joint ventures to cooperatively explore new technologies

Proponents say this will give Israel the ability to build its own advanced weapons without the us having to provide them. Opponents feel that this will be a permanent back door that Israel can use to improve its own military technology which can then be used to oppress others in the region

My feeling is that this is an effort to make it harder for future administrations to walk away from Israel entirely and ensure that Israel has continued us support even if a israel negative government were to be elected.

Some will say that's good, some will say that's bad. But I don't think it's handing America's technology Over to anyone selling out america to the Israelis.

So when people say it's harmless and just the way to facilitate things they're probably being a little disingenuous, and when they say that this is an integration or blending of american and is really military that's probably a gross overstatement as well

What is true is it does facilitate and make it easier for America to provide support to Israel and for Israel to be a little more independent of America militarily and whether or not that's a good thing would be a matter of discussion

Rather level headed.

Good.

[User]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Not a fan of one of the ancient tribes.

 

What does this even mean? We are talking about present times, and now you are spewing full-on anti-Semitic garbage. 

[Nationalist]

38 minutes ago, User said:

What does this even mean? We are talking about present times, and now you are spewing full-on anti-Semitic garbage. 

Im betting you know what I mean.

1. There are a number of Semitic people...mostly in the Arab peninsula. 

2. The Russian and Eastern European Jews are hardly Semitic.

3. The Russian and Eastern European Jews in Israel are the Ashkenazi. A tribe with a long history of expulsion and trouble.

4. I dont trust them. Nor do a lot of people who know history.

[User]

7 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Im betting you know what I mean.

1. There are a number of Semitic people...mostly in the Arab peninsula. 

2. The Russian and Eastern European Jews are hardly Semitic.

3. The Russian and Eastern European Jews in Israel are the Ashkenazi. A tribe with a long history of expulsion and trouble.

4. I dont trust them. Nor do a lot of people who know history.

You are, full on, posting anti-semitic garbage. No wonder why you so irrationally oppose Israel. 

Seriously, man, be better. This is just pure shit you are engaged in right now. No excuse for it, I won't tolerate it. 

[Nationalist]

28 minutes ago, User said:

You are, full on, posting anti-semitic garbage. No wonder why you so irrationally oppose Israel. 

Seriously, man, be better. This is just pure shit you are engaged in right now. No excuse for it, I won't tolerate it. 

So dont.

Doesn't change my mind or the history.

Nor does it change the fact that the full-blood Semites are not the vast majority of Israelis. The Palestinians are though.

Edited 9 hours ago by Nationalist

[User]

15 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So dont.

Doesn't change my mind or the history.

Nor does it change the fact that the full-blood Semites are not the vast majority of Israelis. The Palestinians are though.

No, it just shows you are an ignorant, bigoted anti-semite that is judging an entire people by their history. 

Look at you, talking about "full-blood"

WTF is wrong with you?

 

[Nationalist]

11 minutes ago, User said:

No, it just shows you are an ignorant, bigoted anti-semite that is judging an entire people by their history. 

Look at you, talking about "full-blood"

WTF is wrong with you?

 

Dude...history speaks for itself.

[User]

Just now, Nationalist said:

Dude...history speaks for itself.

Enough of your bigoted anti-semitic ignorance. This whole thread has been little more than you posting one baseless assertion after another, running from questions to back them up with you now resorting to this shit. 

You should be ashamed of yourself. 

[Nationalist]

39 minutes ago, User said:

Enough of your bigoted anti-semitic ignorance. This whole thread has been little more than you posting one baseless assertion after another, running from questions to back them up with you now resorting to this shit. 

You should be ashamed of yourself. 

Well I'm not. I'm very aware of the history and dont ignore it or hide from it.

I'm afraid your typical accusations are both way off the mark and frankly...irrelevant. 

[User]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Well I'm not. I'm very aware of the history and dont ignore it or hide from it.

I'm afraid your typical accusations are both way off the mark and frankly...irrelevant. 

No, you are ignorantly generalizing an entire people with the typical anti-Semitic tropes. 

You are proving to be a very detestable person on here. It is one thing to see you cheer on Russia, but this is clearly over the line. 

 

[Nationalist]

28 minutes ago, User said:

No, you are ignorantly generalizing an entire people with the typical anti-Semitic tropes. 

You are proving to be a very detestable person on here. It is one thing to see you cheer on Russia, but this is clearly over the line. 

 

Ya...sure Hymee.

BTW...looks like Trump finally got a deal with Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz.

I wonder if Israel is on its own now.

Edited 7 hours ago by Nationalist

[Deluge]

On 6/12/2026 at 10:32 AM, John Johnston said:

Well, America has the most unqualified, incompetent people ever running the government these days. What do people expect? Y'all voted for a circus clown. And that is what you got. Shrug. 

"Shrug". 

lol

 

[robosmith]

On 6/12/2026 at 3:24 PM, Nationalist said:

Yes. Now I've read the bill and as I'd suspected, I'm not a fan.

Hell I'm not even a fan of this 5 eyes thing NATO has going. Should Israel join NATO? Would the Turkish people agree to that?

This is just a bad idea. Especially now.

5 eyes is not a NATO thing. It is a separate arrangement between the 5 members for closer intellgence sharing.

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

5 eyes is not a NATO thing. It is a separate arrangement between the 5 members for closer intellgence sharing.

United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. 

That's the "5 eyes".

And if any of them get intel, so do the rest of NATO.

Go back to your zucchini.