RFK Jr. Dumps Democrats, Libertarian Party Blasts RFK Jr.'s Stance on Israel
RFK Jr.'s anti-war supporters are welcome to defect, the Libertarian Party said in a statement.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is running for president as an independent, he announced on Monday.
"I'm here to declare myself an independent candidate for president of the United States," Kennedy told supporters at a rally in Philadelphia. "I'm here to join you in making a new Declaration of Independence for our entire nation."
Kennedy had previously challenged President Joe Biden from within the Democratic Party; his exit means that Marianne Williamson is now Biden's sole primary Democratic contender.
RFK Jr.'s declaration is notable for another reason: It ends speculation that he might seek the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination. Kennedy is not a libertarian and historically has held positions on a variety of issues that are fairly anathema to libertarianism, including his views on environmental regulation, affirmative action, and until recently, gun control. But he is an outspoken opponent of COVID-19 mandates—as well as the COVID-19 vaccines—and a critic of American foreign policy with respect to the Ukraine-Russia war.
These last two stances have endeared him to some in the Libertarian Party (L.P.), who hoped that he was moving in a libertarian direction on a variety of issues. RFK Jr. attended both PorcFest and FreedomFest, two yearly libertarian festivals, and seemed to be sincerely courting independent voters of both populist and libertarian bents. He also fielded questions from Reason and others about his evolving views.
Back in June, I asked L.P. Chair Angela McArdle about RFK Jr.'s candidacy. She told me that it was exciting to see him reconsidering some of his previous views.
"The lockdowns and mandates seem to have stirred an awakening within him, causing him to reconsider many of his other political stances," she said at the time.
Kennedy's announcement of an independent run was received cordially by the L.P.; his declaration of support for unlimited aid to Israel, not so much. Following the horrific attacks by Hamas on Israeli civilians over the weekend, RFK Jr. said the U.S. should provide Israel with"whatever it needs to defend itself."
This ignominious, unprovoked, and barbaric attack on Israel must be met with world condemnation and unequivocal support for the Jewish state's right to self-defense. We must provide Israel with whatever it needs to defend itself — now. As President, I'll make sure that our policy…
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) October 7, 2023
This political position was rightly criticized by McArdle and the L.P. as profoundly un-libertarian: U.S. taxpayers should not be forced to pay for the defenses of other countries.
We are the only ones who are actually anti-war in every context.
Not just when it's convenient.
All of the disenfranchised anti-war supporters of @RobertKennedyJr are welcome in the Libertarian Party. https://t.co/h4YVAnvE4q
— Libertarian Party (@LPNational) October 7, 2023
Unfortunately, RFK Jr. is hardly the only political figure to make such a declaration; both Democratic and Republican leaders have committed to providing military aid to Israel, and the Pentagon is already deploying warships to the area.
Many Americans are understandably moved by images and videos of appalling violence being committed against Israeli civilians. But there is little reason to think that providing even more money and weapons to the government of Israel will help create peaceful living conditions for either the Israelis or the Palestinians. We can have compassion for people who are suffering around the world, but we must also have humility about U.S. foreign policy and the likely results of interventionism.
If RFK Jr. hasn't quite learned that yet—despite some encouraging signs—the Libertarian Party probably isn't the right home for him at present.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Kennedy is not a libertarian and historically has held positions on a variety of issues that are fairly anathema to libertarianism, including his views on environmental regulation"
Not seeing much of a difference between his old views on global warming and Ron Bailey's last column.
I dont see how Polis is dreamier than RFK Jr.
Polis is gay, so he gets the alphabet cred.
Ctrl+f "Trump": 0 results.
Damnit! Now the "lack" of TDS feels weird. Weird in that, the most anti-war President of the last 4 administrations (at least) and the leading Republican nominee hasn't even been mentioned or quoted. The guy that Reason was, multiple times, certain to start WWIII and Reason, seemingly, can't find a quote from him. It's almost like he's more popular than RFK Jr. *and* more passive than the WH *and* more aligned with the LP and this magazine's shit-filled stupidity fills them with a literal blinding rage.
Remind me again how many wars Trump managed to end.
Toi be fair, other than writing for a supposedly libertarian magazine, has Rony Bailey ever been a libertarian?
What about Ron's old book, Global Warming and other Eco-Myths?
And thanks for reminding Reason that climate deniers are still a thing.
Thank you for reminding use you are the Public Ignoramus trying to high-jack a website addy. And if you'd like to prove you aren't, please respond to this, shit bag:
"For those who claim this is an existential risk, tell us, IN SPECIFICS, what you propose, how it is to be accomplished, what you hope will be the result. Please include a schedule.
This entire issue has the stench of several failed morality plays; at least the ‘rona chicken-littles had the worthless masks they could point to; you bozos got nothing.
Oh, and if we continue our sinning ways, when is the rapture?"
Put up or shut up, asshole.
Climate clearly exists. No one is denying that. The only thing we deny are your fraudulent propaganda based on corrupted studies that support your cult’s irrational AGW beliefs.
Personally, I find Robby's sentence to be very antithetical to libertarianism, 'anathema' is a noun.
"This ignominious, unprovoked, and barbaric attack on Israel must be met with world condemnation and unequivocal support for the Jewish state’s right to self-defense. We must provide Israel with whatever it needs to defend itself — now. As President, I’ll make sure that our policy is unambiguous so that the enemies of Israel will think long and hard before attempting aggression of any kind.
I applaud the strong statements of support from the Biden White House for Israel in her hour of need. However, the scale of these attacks means it is likely that Israel will need to wage a sustained military campaign to protect its citizens. Statements of support are fine, but we must follow through with unwavering, resolute, and practical action. America must stand by our ally throughout this operation and beyond as it exercises its sovereign right to self-defense."
Depends if he means handing bigger piles of cash to Israel, or stop stopping it from actually fighting Hamas and Iran.
We should offer them support in the form of vetoing all the stupid resolutions that will inevitably come out of the UN once they have retaliated properly. And assure them that we will allow them to do whatever they feel is necessary.
Exactly.
I am also not opposed to some raking in of piles of cash in exchange for weapons.
Often “selling weapons” means loosening prohibitions and removing other obstacles for other countries to use their own money for our arms instead of a gift of cash for use at our MIC vendors.
Does the MIC take gift cards?
>>>we must also have humility about U.S. foreign policy and the likely results of interventionism.
ya, when does the Where Did Da Six Billion Go, John Kirby? piece drop?
Qatar, apparently.
Although I have many very libertarian views, I am a realist and that is a significant difference with the Libertarian Party's orthodoxy. Perhaps they should consider resurrecting Neville Chamberlain as their candidate to again promote his version of "peace in our time."
If Neville Chamberlain hadn’t stuck his nose in at all, the Czechs might have ultimately stopped Hitler before any war could spread. There was a detailed plan by the Wehrmacht leadership to storm the Reichstag if Hitler declared war on Czechoslovakia and prevent another war.
Instead, Neville convinced the Czechs to surrender the heavily-fortified Sudetenland. The Germans would likely have been bogged down for months getting through-they weren’t nearly as mobilized or coordinated as they would have been a year later. And there was no deal with the USSR either. If Chamberlain had done nothing but issue vague, stern warnings, Hitler was stuck, and might have been deposed by the army before the war became large scale/
The problem with Chamberlain is that he DID intervene in a scenario that was none of his business, and almost certainly made it worse.
As someone who has spent much time researching WWII issues, if you have a cite for this, it would be much appreciated:
"...There was a detailed plan by the Wehrmacht leadership to storm the Reichstag if Hitler declared war on Czechoslovakia and prevent another war..."
Yea I'm unaware of that part, but the broader point about Chamberlain's involvement forcing Czechoslovakia to cede territory despite strong defenses is a good one. War probably would've come anyway, but it would've looked very different.
Yeah. There was a pretty good chance Czechoslovakia could have beaten the Germany military at that time.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oster_conspiracy
There was a plan, wouldn't say it was well thought out. It was one of several plotted coups against Hitler that never really hatched.
Nope.
Wiki is a good source for back up cites; in this case, there were none which didn't need a whole lot more research. IOWs, these are not cites, but invitations to rabbit holes.
There are well over 200 WWII books on the shelves, ignoring those like "Roosevelt and Churchill" or "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" which are under US history; not a single one has ever hinted at such.
Got a cite? I'm happy to look.
Good challenge. We'll see if you get any takers.
Fuck dude, now you know the name of it. Go find more. If you're really interested in researching information about WWII and not just sealioning.
Does this work?
https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060955252/reasonmagazinea-20/
Right now, exterminating Hamas is the libertarian thing to do.
I'm ok with wiping Hamas off the face of the earth. They're holding Americans hostage too. The U.S. should do what it takes.
Anything less than the complete extermination of Hamas will be a horrible mistake.
Phrasing!! "Do what it takes" is an excuse Biden will use as an excuse to hand over $60 billion (10% for the big guy) to Hamas for a cease fire that lasts to mid November 2024. He claims a win for reelection, Hamas gets resupplied and it all gets bloodier or Israel gets blamed for rejecting peace.
How the hell are libertarians pro-Hamas?
It's not about peaceful living conditions. It's about killing, murdering, and raping Jews (or anyone that might be a Jew). Palestinians could have had been pretty much any time in the last 50 years if they just stopped being genocidal assholes.
At this point, there is very little difference between the Far Left and the Libertarian party and Reason. I mean, when you're too crazy for RJK Jr, there's just no words for how delusional you are.
"Self-defense or defending your family is a violation of the NAP" - Chemjeff two months ago.
Yeah, well...
Did Fatfuck die? Haven’t seen him in a while. And he’s hard to miss.
No libertarian can logically support Islamic monsters.
Very true, but too many of all political persuasions have taken the position of Idiotarianism.
Eric S. Raymond defines it and lambasts it in this famous article that is still timely and timeless to this very moment:
Why We Fight--An Anti-Idiotarian Manifesto (2.0)
http://catb.org/~esr/aim/
True enough. The horrific attacks on Israel last weekend were truly monstrous, and should be considered war crimes. But two wrongs don't make a right. Israel is now killing civilians as well. Telling the whole population of Gaza to "leave [which they can't do] or die" is not "self-defense". Neither is siege warfare, which, while it has a long history, is now generally considered a war crime in itself. Yes, support Israel's efforts to defend itself. But reserve the right to evaluate what is or isn't actually self-defense.
Hamas kill 1,100 South Koreans, Iran allies itself with North Korea
RFK JR - "We must give South Korea whatever it takes to win"
The "real" libertarians - "You are not a real anti war candidate. We disown you"
This breathtaking tone deafness is why they will never win any national office. The tea party was sometimes criticized for its ideological rigidity, but they have nothing on the LP.
What if we never get involved with Israel but bar immigration from Palestine or anywhere that funds Hamas? We don't wage war, but take measures to protect the nation. Oh no, we can't do that either. Because immigration. In fact, we have to take in a gazillion Muslim "refugees" from terrorist states and settle them in blue cities where the police force is being dwindled down.
So the LP, ever so white and insular, exist in their own little ideological purity, admitting that "there is no good answer in the middle east" but loudly protesting any proposal that's not libertarian.
THIS! ^ As a reminder, the Libertarian platform reads: "We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service."
This is sloppy language. If the LP make the Jeffersonian Isolation Model as part of their platform, then Jeffersonian language should follow; "policeman for the world"... ugh.
The libertarian party has adopted the Trudeau position of "if you kill your enemies, they win."
Pear; The LP has always been anti-war. It still may be, even though the republican Feces Caucus has taken over (see anti-war.com). We shall see. Please don't confuse us with Turd-o.
Even those citizens that are anti war understand that you cannot ignore mass killing maniacs. We all know that some violent dogs need to be put down.
Yeah but Israel is perfectly capable of putting their own mad dog down themselves. F35's vs paragliders literally and figuratively.
I don't think the LP nor Reason is arguing Israel needs to be pacifist, just that the US doesn't need to be involved.
Rather us be involved with an ACTUAL ally over the people we're involved with now.
I don't think we are being offered that option.
Israel lost thousands of people who contributed to the economy (which will be at a standstill as tourism and consumer spending will ground to a halt) and their infrastructure is damaged. The aid we give Israel would be fungible. We help prop them up and assist the victims of the tragedy as their military spending ramps up.
And remember, thanks to the war in Ukraine, the world is running out of weapons and ammunition. Israel will need to replenish its own stock in the near future. If we don't supply them in a timely manner, Israel might find themselves in a bind later.
We'll be aiding Ukraine AND Israel for the foreseeable future. That's the reality, right or wrong. At a certain point, exasperated Americans will throw their hands up in the air and say "stop limitless funding of military conflicts and just close the country to people who want to blow us up".
Libertarians are not “anti-war in every context” and if the Libertarian Party thinks so, that represents their colossal disconnect from the people they are claiming to represent, not ours.
Abject pacifism has not been a viable strategy for any culture ever.
Being “anti war “ doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a pacifist, it just means you don’t go to war with everyone on the planet.
That's not "actually anti-war in every context", which was the curious wording of the claim shown in the article.
But there is little reason to think that providing even more money and weapons to the government of Israel will help create peaceful living conditions for either the Israelis or the Palestinians
If Israel destroys Hamas, that will create peace. I'm sure that's what the Israelis are thinking now.
So what is his platform, and where will he get his cabinet?
Ikea?
Ukraine is not our ally. Israel is.
Ukraine didn't attack one of our ships or sell the plans to the F-16 to China.
Israel is not our ally (they are far too eager to suck up to China and Russia, despite it getting them little), but they are a bastion of civilization and democracy in an ocean of murderous barbarians.
Ukraine might not be our ally, but if it falls, Russia will attack our allies, countries we are obligated to defend by treaty. Better support than now than spend far more money and lives in the future.
Zero evidence that Putin has plans to expand the war beyond Ukraine. Cool Neocon talking point though.
Boomer chickenhawks are some of the dumbest NPCs
"Zero evidence that Putin has plans to expand the war beyond Ukraine."
And that means, what, exactly? Putin had 'plans' to occupy Ukraine in a couple of weeks; why would I care about Putin's 'plans'?
I think we’ll all care if Putin plans to make use of his nuclear arsenal.
Yes, but Putin by now understands that the US arsenal is superior to that of his depleted arsenal. Or we hope he is more competent than droolin' Joe.
My concern is that Putin really is dying, and may become desperate enough to green light a limited, but devastating, nuclear strike in Ukraine. Which would have far reaching, and long term disastrous effects. Especially considering Ukraine’s role in European energy production and farming.
Or if he does die, and whoever takes over is crazy and launches an even larger strike. This isn’t out of the question, as no one really knows who ends up in charge when Putin dies or becomes incapacitated. It’s also one of the reasons that regime change is risky there.
The same evidence as there was he would expand beyond Crimea.
He will expand until he dies.
Russian tanks are not crossing the Oder anytime. This isn't the Soviet Union which was supproted by the neocon forefathers (until Trotsky lost to Stalin which is very insightful..as is their current support for their new Trotsky the Drag President Zelinsky).
Russia is a regional power. We supported the overthrow of the duly elected Ukrainian President (so much for democracy). Two corrupt eastern european countries at war over land and influence..sounds like what has been going on for over 500 years there..not our concern.
As for Hamas and Israel...this is a war between eastern europeans (most Israeli's are eastern european) and arabs...civilians are either acceptable collateral damage (Israel) or targets (Hamas).
Trying to apply Western/Northern/Southern European war "rules" in this part of the world is a waste of time. T
"If he dies, he dies..."
Also the idea of "spend far more money and lives in the future" is rather objectively wrong, if not outright stupid. Especially since the current conflict in Ukraine is not over.
More than half the reason the war is still going on is because Russia *didn't* attack NATO. The idea that we'd lose more American lives if Russia went to war with NATO is an oblique assertion that the collective might of the European contingent of NATO isn't superior to the Ukrainian government rather literally throwing AK-47s at civilians (I'd be willing to cede France).
"Russia will attack our allies"
Doubtful.
Half of Ukraine had always been Russia before it was turned into the Ukrainian SSR to gain the Soviets an extra seat at the League of Nations and then the United Nations.
Following the Invasion of Poland in September 1939, German and Soviet troops divided the territory of Poland. With this Eastern Galicia and Volhynia, which were part of Poland, became part of Ukraine. This is where the Ukraine as we know it began. Created out of bits of Russia and Poland by Hitler and Stalin.
Further territorial gains were secured in 1940, when the Ukrainian SSR incorporated the northern and southern districts of Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina, and the Hertsa region from the territories the USSR forced Romania to cede. These territorial gains of the USSR were internationally recognized by the Paris peace treaties of 1947.
Russia went nuts at the thought of parts of the original Russian homeland, particularly Kiev, becoming part of NATO. It'd be like Boston and Philadelphia becoming China's allies and Chinese military bases created there.
"..Russia went nuts at the thought of parts of the original Russian homeland, particularly Kiev, becoming part of NATO. It’d be like Boston and Philadelphia becoming China’s allies and Chinese military bases created there..."
Well, no. You'd have to cherry-pick some date in history to claim Kiev was part of an "original Russian homeland" at that time; care to pick a date and cite it? For most of recorded history, "Russia" was a claim of a state with no actual metes.
Example: Xinjiang was never part of a (Han) China, it was (and is) an occupied territory to the west of China lacking a military sufficient to push the (Han) Chinese back. It has been occupied by (Han) China off and on since some time BC as the income taken from Silk Road traders supported the costs of occupation. And then didn't, which meant the Han retreated eastward to deal with their own issues.
Aside: Reading of the Silk Road (maybe a half dozen books) and then of the Black Death (only a couple) makes clear how Han tariff policies unleashed the Black Death on humanity: It was resident in a particular Marmot population in Siberia. As the traders responded to Han tariffs, they moved north of the Taklamakan desert basin, and encountered that Marmot population; hey, presto! Government policies manage to kill off something like a quarter of the world's population!
Watermelons like to chime in here?
Marmot soup in a wet market?
🙂
😉
Seriously, that is interesting. I’d like to read more about that. What were the books you read to learn that?
Is the Ocean of Murderous Barbarians part of the North Atlantic?
Fuck off and die, dimbulb.
Attacked one of our ships sixty years ago. Let's see who else we call allies that have attacked us in the past. Britain? Check. France? Check. Germany? Check. Japan? Check. Italy? Check. Actually it might be easier to list countries we're allied with that we've never had a conflict with in the past.
And just for those playing at home, who are saying when did France attack us, look up the Pseudo-War of the 1790s. Not to mention the Nine Years War, the War of Austrian Succession, the War of Spanish Succession and the Seven Years War. But if we limit it to just post 1776, look up the Pseudo-War. Which contrary to it's name was an actual armed conflict.
You're doing a bit of a stretch here, but the US was taking a decidedly anti-Israeli stance in the Suez debacle. Ike finessed the issue; had I been in charge, the Israelis would have been handed a bit of a bloody nose in response, just to make it clear who, in real-politic terms, owned the bats and the balls.
American Jews did not vote in a majority for Ike despite his leadership in defeating Hitler and saving Jews still alive in camps. They supported Stevenson..somehow this is never discussed. Maybe Ben Shapiro can explain this one as it suggests left wing politics and social policy meant more than defeating hitler and saving their relatives...
Yeah, but if it's France, that would make it Pseudo.
🙂
😉
"Ukraine didn’t attack one of our ships"
OK.
"or sell the plans to the F-16 to China."
Cite missing. And one of nardz twitter linksain't a cite.
Aww, look at sevo simping for "journalists"
Absolutely hilarious how insecure you are about independent media
Not at all surprising how stupid you are. Fuck off and die, twitter-shit.
There's that typical high IQ sqrlvo response.
Can't say why legacy media is more trustworthy than independent media utilizing Twitter, but is full of that syphilitic boomer rage.
You're as worthless as sarcasmic, faggot.
Guys, let’s focus our animosity at leftist cunts like Shreek, Fatfuck Pedo Jeffy, White Mike, Sarc, Mod, etc. and not each other.
Far better to give them a verbal beatdown.
"There’s that typical high IQ sqrlvo response..."
If I used longer words, you wouldn't understand.
But if Israel falls, I'm sure Russia and Iran will do nothing, and millions of Jews around the world without a place to call to call home won't be targets of systemic oppression. Sure.
How many of our allies did Russia attack after we let them take over Crimea? Russia shared intelligence with us and provided us with airspace. All those options are gone now.
Israel has been our ally in a meaningful sense than Ukraine ever was. 90% of Gen Zers probably didn't even know Ukraine existed during the pandemic.
one of our allies yes..the 51st State no
Hell, Gen Zers didn't know Israel existed during the pandemic.
🙂
😉
20% of Gen Zers don't even know which gender they are.
“Ukraine is not our ally. Israel is.”
Israel is not an ally. For allies, look to Canada, Belgium, Turkey, Germany and others. Fellow members of an alliance of mutual self defense, like NATO. Israel is not a member of such an alliance. Israel is a ‘strategic partner,’ a less exalted role that puts them on a par with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and the old government of Afghanistan before the Taliban took control (again).
A strategic partnership is not an agreement of mutual defense, but an agreement for the US to hand over billions of dollars and Israel agrees to accept it.
Did you have a point other than to prove once again that your pedantry is oh, so important to you and is proof that you are a pedantic asshole to the rest of us?
You don’t have to have a collection of Superfriends to have a single ally. Dummy!
Ukraine is not our ally. Israel is.
Ukraine got attacked largely because of our policies (especially our involvement in getting them to give up their nukes). Israel got attacked because of their policies.
Ukraine can't win without help. Israel can't lose.
They're both one the other side of the world and should fight their own wars, but if we have a moral obligation to help anyone...
They’re both one the other side of the world and should fight their own wars, but if we have a moral obligation to help anyone…
Uh, excuse me. You didn't answer anything, you just equivocated and trailed off.
Ukraine chose to side with a Russian adversary. The policy Israel is being attacked for is "Don't preemptively wipe other nations off the Earth."
Are they both utilitarian and pragmatically irrelevant or do you, somehow, rationalize a morally-justified Holy War to engage in on behalf of one and not the other?
Are they both utilitarian and pragmatically irrelevant or do you, somehow, rationalize a morally-justified Holy War to engage in on behalf of one and not the other?
Neither of those. They are relevant, yet pragmatically not our problem. Since WWII, when our military industrial complex took off, I think we've adequately demonstrated that our military is most useful at making our problems, our opponents problems, and the world's problems worse. Now we need wars just to get through the day. The 1st step is admitting you have a problem.
Paul; Since we can say nothing against Israel; I would call them less our ally and more our master.
The trouble is the US government has to be involved with supplying munitions from here to Israel, given the need for export licenses. Libertarians might wish it done without tax funding, and maybe it even will be, but foreign states and even foreign private actors need specific authorization to buy them.
Israel, unlike Ukraine and some others, actually pays for the weapons we send them. So do the Saudis and Kuwaitis for that matter. I thought libertarians were all for markets right up until we sell weapons to people they don't like.
https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel/
"...Since its founding in 1948, the United States has provided Israel with over $125 billion in bilateral assistance focused on addressing new and complex security threats, bridging Israel’s capability gaps through security assistance and cooperation, increasing interoperability through joint exercises, and helping Israel maintain its Qualitative Military Edge (QME)..."
You do realize that "bilateral" means, at least, payment-in-kind, do you not?
You do realize that “bilateral” means, at least, payment-in-kind, do you not?
Also, we pay Israelis, an ally, to perform (e.g.) missile research and we get the results of said missile research. There may be a case of technology we paid for winding up being used against us, but that's secondary (or even tertiary or lower) to the research and happens when we give weapons to Ukraine, not an ally, and don't get any of the research results, anyway.
And that's strictly for 'allies' and 'not exactly adversaries', as opposed to, say, paying China to perform GOF research and getting a million people killed by the product of the research.
Fuck, I know it sounds callous, but forget the million people, it got the entire economy killed.
Yeah, list is not exhaustive.
$1B to get copied in on all the Iron Dome research is nothing compared to the tens of billions handed over to Ukraine with no promise of anything or hundreds of thousands-to-millions handed over to China with the upshot being millions of deaths and hundreds of billions of lost revenue, business, livelihoods, property, etc.
You seem to be confused about what governments including the US mean by the term "bilateral aid". Bilateral refers to there only being 2 parties involved. In the case of bilateral aid to Israel, the US is the provider and Israel is the receiver of the aid. The US can include requirements for how the aid is used. For example, the US can give a $3.5 billion bilateral military aid package to Israel with the requirement that the funds be used to buy US made arms. If this looks a lot like a government version of a money laundering operation to you, you may be beginning to understand what is going on here.
"The trouble is the US government has to be involved with supplying munitions from here to Israel,..."
Nope.
I support Ukraine as a nation invaded, and support our ability to supply any military materiel they are willing to buy.
Ditto Israel.
The difference is clear: droolin' Joe is shipping US taxpayer goods to Ukraine while Israel is paying for it.
Fuck droolin' Joe and his crooked connections to Ukraine.
Israel may pay for some weapons, but the US has been funneling money to them for decades. The US State Department makes this clear:
https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel/
You seemingly are too stupid to understand your link; see above, idiot.
A little surprising to see a JFK Jr article that' s not a hit piece and some tepid movement towards an anti war position. I agree that Israel should defend itself. I don't agree that we should spend our blood and treasure on the proposition. As far as RFKJR is concerned this is classic Kennedy knee jerking on the subject of Israel. He really can't help himself.
All the LP cares about is ensuring the flow of military aged males from 3rd world countries into the US continues at a pace of millions per year
https://twitter.com/kenzietuff/status/1711545479387840810?t=iZstGfJa2WkNSggAfUOE5g&s=19
It is a bit surreal to watch people who have lectured us about a genocide of their people for decades openly call for one.
https://twitter.com/Indian_Bronson/status/1711555967983186052?t=KoAg0PYhf0LFGqSIL1xISA&s=19
It's even worse
The US/Europe mostly import the very poorest and least talented of the most populated parts of the Third World
So Indore and Tehran have nicer trains than NYC and LA, Singapore and CDMX are more walkable and green than SF or Chicago
[Link]
Teheran has nice trains because China wants them as an ally.
https://twitter.com/CovfefeAnon/status/1711548160839925918?t=aFdqNGYi5xDXsUW2bfcnMw&s=19
It's anathema to the progressive religion that a conflict be settled when the "wrong side" would win
They only piously look away and allow a victory when their pets (communists, browns, blacks, etc.) are on the winning side - everything else must be stopped short of conclusion
[Link]
One big correction:
RFK did not dump the democrat party, they dumped him. They quite openly rigged the primary in a way that is really deeply corrupt. Better that they had just said they are not having a primary than to declare all votes in early states are for Biden alone while prohibiting campaigning.
This is a much bigger story than 1 candidate. The DNC rigs elections. They are proud of that fact.
They also proudly proclaimed that they had fortified the 2020 election. They assured voters of that fact before the election. They bragged about it after the fact.
There are only 2 dots on the page. They are directly adjacent to each other.
I'm not sure why it is so hard for so many to connect those two dots.
But the big story here is that Kennedy is fleeing a party that explicitly will not allow him to stand for the nomination. A party that believes in silencing dissent, both within the party and within the nation, and is in control of most power in the country.... that is the story here. Not some theoretical "libertarian moment".
Libertarians did not attract these folks away from team D. Team D is putting the boot on dissent, and some folks are fleeing the boot. But will they come crawling back when all the power stays with team D?
"...RFK did not dump the democrat party, they dumped him. They quite openly rigged the primary in a way that is really deeply corrupt..."
Hard to find a good guy here.
Oh please. RJK Jr was never a serious member of the Democrat party. He's never held office, he's never done any sort of campaigning for members. Other than the Kennedy name, he's a rando nutcase.
And beyond that, he's far more popular with Republicans. He should be in that primary.
Which is why I think some Republicans are upset that he is now running as an independent. No doubt they fear that some that liked his positions on COVID stuff would vote for Trump over Biden will vote for him instead. I don't see anyone that preferred Biden over Trump voting for RFK Jr.
Of course, if something occurs that changes the GOP primary numbers to someone other than Trump, then it's a whole different campaign.
Keep in mind that the slimy pile of lefty shit JasonT20 supports cold-blooded murder as a preventative measure in the case of, well, he's pretty much open to anything:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Isn't that just wonderful?
It's the serious Democratic Party candidates that should scare the bejesus out of everyone, not the "rando nutcases".
The democrat party should be snuffed out. Case closed.
https://twitter.com/leslibless/status/1711576407623524514?t=T70rRL5zTswe6Kj4aFaeiQ&s=19
Oh look at the electric bus on fire in London; smack in the center of the ‘clean air zone.’
[Video]
"The bus fire happened in Bradford".
This is just the kind of "independent media" we need: reported by morons who can't tell an electric bus from a diesel-powered one, and can't differentiate between the metropolis of London and the city of Bradford.
“One of our buses on the 607 service was involved in a fire incident on the upper deck this afternoon which was reported to the depot at approximately 3pm. … Firefighters extinguished the fire, but the upper deck was completely destroyed.
Pretty sure neither the diesel engine nor the fuel is stored on the upper deck, dumbfuck.
Worse than the “independent media”? Shit-eating asshats like you that can’t even read or understand the corrections to the “independent media” that include references to the manufacturer detailing how the bus is not, strictly or in fact, “diesel-powered”.
You’ve done a great job of convincing me that even if the “independent media” is deceptive or dishonest, even just on accident, you would be *more* deceptive or dishonest, with a more full set of facts at hand and no overt time constraints, seemingly *on purpose*.
Rarely, do I disagree with Robby Suave; this is that rare occasion. (1) RFK Jr. is not a libertarian. At best, he’s an opportunist lime his family. (2) He shouldn’t be given a catch pole, let alone access to more power. He won’t be. (3) The U.S. should support Israel in its war against Hamas, Hezbollah, and eventually Iran. The destruction of the latter is a prerequisite to peace.
Legalize or decriminalize psilocybin, marijuana, and push government to the furtherest outreaches of society and allow individualism to thrive. Perhaps, however, you should leave foreign policy to serious thinkers. It cannot be said with a straight face that supporting Israel in a war it didn’t start is anti-libertarian; unless you see Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, or the pusillanimous Qataris as champions of freedom.
Hamas and Hezbollah should be obliterated, rounded up, tried, and executed. They are not a government or even terrorist organizations, they are gangs of mass murderers and thugs.
But Iran is an actual nation, even if we don't like them. A war on Iran would be catastrophic.
Really appreciate your words about these fields, love the information you tried to share. Thanks for sharing this information, I hope you like this too.
Thanks for sharing this information. cucumber in water recipe
Don't click on it! This has all the markings of a spam biz-op!
Think: What does a cucumber in water recipe have to do with Israel except to make Kosher Dill Pickles, which has nothing to do with foreign policy?
I'm kind of disappointed he didn't get the Libertarian nomination. It is true he is not a libertarian, but that has not been an significant obstacle in the past. And giving RFK a platform from which to torment Shitty Joe would have probably been the one opportunity the LP will ever have to make an impact on national politics.
No one has gotten the LP nomination yet bro. The convention is still like seven and a half months away.
Besides, I don't think he even intends to seek it. I think he's going to run as a true independent, meaning no party affiliation.
The democracy-hating democrats will of course try to pull every single dirty trick in the book they can come up with to try to keep him off the ballots everywhere, no matter how many signatures he collects.
The LP’s ballot access is sweet, but the Libertarian label is an anchor holding even a well qualified candidate below 5%. (See Gary Johnson's 2016 showing, as a popular 2-term governor who was clearly superior to Trump or Clinton in accomplishments and character.) An independent has upside if they catch on. It’s not like you need tons of money any more, just put out videos every week and let them go viral.
In the past I have been harsh with Robby. Today I agree with his comments in this post. This Israeli-Palestinian problem is so complex , nevertheless our government and media is committed to a resolution that I do not think is correct or honest.
It’s not complex. Israel is a civilized, peaceful country, and the Palestinians want to murder them all, no matter what.
Yes.
You must be willfully obtuse or just plain stupid to avoid this reality.
Given the FACT that RFK Jr. has ZERO chance of being elected president in 2024, the only relevant issue is whether or how much impact his candidacy might have on the democrat vs. republican race.
If the race is Trump v Joetard, I don't see ANY Trump supporters changing their vote to RFK Jr., but I think there's a good chance that a significant number of democrat voters will opt to vote for RFK Jr. out of protest against Joetard being a LOSER IDIOT and/or out of loyalty to the old Kennedy legend, back when the democrat party wasn't a total socialist/communist disgrace.
That's my brief, rather shallow synopsis of the situation. One could delve into all sorts of details, but at this point it would be just argument for the sake of argument. Whose vote totals in which states an RFK Jr Independent candidacy will diminish is the ONLY practical consideration. Everything else is academic.
If the race is Trump v Joetard, I don’t see ANY Trump supporters changing their vote to RFK Jr., but I think there’s a good chance that a significant number of democrat voters will opt to vote for RFK Jr. out of protest against Joetard being a LOSER IDIOT and/or out of loyalty to the old Kennedy legend, back when the democrat party wasn’t a total socialist/communist disgrace.
This is probably accurate. I would say (and I'm not the only one to have made this observation) that many of my friends on the dissident left will not vote for Trump, but they likely would have voted for RFK because he ticks all those anti-DNC boxes... without being Trump.
Then I take it that we are more or less in agreement that the REAL value of RFK Jr.'s candidacy is eventual reform of the democrat party that has drifted WAY too far left and beyond properly representing its voters.
That has also been the REAL value of Trump --- bringing back the republican party from having followed the democrat party to the left with Mitt Romnoid being the reigning idiot of the republican party.
Like Trump or not (and the RNC hates him worse than the DNC hates RFK Jr.), he has succeeded to some degree in rehabilitating the republican party into becoming a viable opposition to what has become the socialist/communist democrat party. RFK Jr. is likewise creating an opposition to that far-left democrat party, but not as a republican.
In that strange way, Trump and RFK Jr. have a lot in common ---- perhaps more than the differences they have --- because they are ultimately trying to influence how party politics functions in America so that it can get back to representing the PEOPLE instead of the one-percenters and corporations that have purchased the RNC and DNC.
The trouble is, how many of the Republicans that aren't Trump supporters might be taken in by RFK Jr?
RFK Sr. Was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist because he supported Israel when it was attacked.
The Libertarian Party would have let Hitler and or Stalin run over the entire world.
Probably. There's definitely a point where one MUST shelve ideology and become pragmatic. I've never trusted ideologues, and I'm not about to start now. It's nice to have ideals, but the bottom line is that we are NOT living in an ideal world. This is the REAL world where real shit happens and has to be dealt with.
That is the problem with ideologies, too closely clutched. They turn into each ideologue's hammer, and everything then becomes an appropriate nail to beat.
But you do hit the right nail on the head with the right hammer - this is the real world, in which people behave stupidly/wickedly/foolishly (note that 1 and 3 are not the same), actions of one lead to the actions of others, and there are no real do-overs to be had.
As Omar Khayyam put it,
"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it."
Until now, I've never wished this comment section had a mechanism for upvoting comments or replies. I couldn't possibly add anything of value to your reply, and only wish I could give it 10,000 upvotes.
Thank'ee most kindly.
That's the problem with pragmatists -- they pretend to have some sort of ideology, but abandon it at the first sign of trouble.
no the LP would have avoided the killing of millions of Vietnamese, Iraqis, Libyans, Yemanese (spell?) and on and on.
The US was attacked by Japan and Hitler declared war on us. Wilson's dragging the US into war in 1917 created the problems which led to WW2.
And the US did nothing to stop Stalin as he took eastern europe. Patton was told to stand down and not take Berlin.
Hamas will be destroyed by Israel but as more of Hamas are killed the colleterial killing of civilians in Gaza will create another Hamas. It won't end until either you have a one state solution or the Palestinians are granted asylum and all leave. Israel is not going anywhere...
Something, something, a rifle behind every blade of grass.
There's a reason the US hasn't been invaded since 1815.
Ackshuyally, Admiral Yamato never said that about "a rifle behind every blade of grass"...although somebody did and attributed it to him.
Nevertheless, whoever said it was right.
Land area, biggest Navy, pop numbers - I think that all figures into that. How many boats from China would it take? India? Russia? 330 million compared to 792 million for all of Europe. (unsure if that counts Russia - probably).
US has been fortune. Mexico and Canada are good neighbors. Europe everyone beat the hell out of each other. After WWII, US became a world power because we still have manufacturing or the most .
I do agree - I'm in Texas. Even the dog has a six shooter.
For me, we are being invaded now by the southern border.
Libertarians shoot themselves in the foot by refusing to compromise on anything. This attitude makes voting for a third party a throw away vote, until there is ranked choice voting.
Supporting Israel or not supporting Israel is about 10% give-a-fuck. Libertarians make stupid stands about things like this, while all the votes go to one totalitarian party or the other. The whole middle is easy to bring along, but Libertarians have to act like extremists and disenfranchise the middle. Maybe we can succeed on Mars.
If you want to just throw away yours and protest, great, but don't bitch when a totalitarian is elected.
"There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, of rational conviction." - Ayn Rand
They could have just said - we don't support war but we support defending yourself. This is Israel defending themselves from attacks.
As a pragmatic patriotic freedom loving capitalist libertarian atheist vegan who supports Trump in 2024 (and did so in 2016 and 2020), I'm pleased RFK Jr won't be the Libertarian Party's nominee and Cornell West won't be the Green Party's nominee, and that No Labels still hasn't chosen a candidate (as those developments will help Trump).
While the LP candidate may draw slightly more votes away from Trump (than Biden), the Green Party candidate, Kennedy, West and the No Label's candidate will likely take away more votes from Biden.
Start now making every month extra $19k or more by just doing an easy online job from home. Last month I have earned and received $16650 from this job by giving this only 3 hrs. a day. Every person can now get this job and start earning online by:-.
Follow details: → →salarybitcoinpay.COM
Well, it sounds like a landslide in the pragmatic, capitalist, atheist vegan demographic.
But....but....Israel, long ago, outlawed capital punishment.
Capital punishment and self-defense/retaliation against eminent death and bodily harm are two different things. One can oppose the first while upholding the latter.
After Gaza is bombed and the situationg goes back to the usual situation until the next "explosion" of Palestanians occurs. Rinse and repeat.
The reality is there is NO two state solution. That boat sailed a long time ago. You can't have a state which is divided into a small Gaza strip and a fragmented due to Israeli settlements West Bank. And Israel will never allow this Palestianian state with any level of autonomy for security reasons. There are only two real solutions to the endless killing.
1. Asylum for all Palestinians: Basically call it a day, Israel gets the land and won. Other arab nations and the US could allow the few million people to move and become citizens. Germans were kicked out in mass around Europe after the war back into Germany.
2. A greater Israel which gives Palestianians full citizenship and some federated system.
2 is not ever going to be acceptable to Israel. 1 is the only answer.
Other Arab nations could have take Option No. 1 at any point in the past 55 years, but chose not to, because they wanted conflict.
Option 2 isn't what Israel wants, or what Hamas wants. It's not an option.
Option 3 is go scorched Earth. Wipe out all the terrorists and anyone who harbors them. And that's the path Hamas started by killing innocent and defenseless men, women, children and babies.
What is Kennedy doing? He didn't think he could beat a bumbling, rambling, incoherent, Alzheimer's afflicted octogenarian incumbent in the primaries? It should have been a cake walk, with everyone else afraid to run against Biden.
Hopefully he spoils it for Biden in the general, but he won't be president now.
You think it’s actually a race? LOL.
A new low for Reason. This is probably the most despicable article I’ve read on this website. When you have the pure evil committed by Hamas (who oppress Palestinians as well as murdering Israelis) in the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, I cannot fathom someone who sits back and pontificates “on the one hand, on the other hand”. It is time for those who support civilization to assist Israel in any way possible.
That's fine but if you force people to do it you're as bad as Hamas.
Libertarians aren't anti-war we're anti offensive war. Wars of defense are completely moral.
"Libertarian Party @LPNational
We are the only ones who are actually anti-war in every context.
Not just when it's convenient. "
Easy to say that when it's not on your front door. HAMAS wants genocide. They don't think Israel should exist. I know not your problem. Your right, US shouldn't police the world. It does not mean turning a blind out.
WWII - Libertarian party - let the Axis have Europe. Pearl Harbor - it's only an island.
Neighbor beats wife in front of the LP (or husband) - not my problem.
Wait, maybe if we send some police over them and they kill someone they will have a statement.
Cash generating easy and fast method to work part time and earn an extra $15,000 or even more than this online. By working in my spare time I made $17990 in my previous month and I am very happy now because of this job. you can try this now by following
the details here…… http://Www.Smartcash1.com
Surprising! I’ve been making 220 Dollars an hour since I started freelance on the Internet six months ago. x8 I work long hours a day from home and do the basic work that I get from the business I met online. share this work for you opportunity This is definitely the best job I have ever done…..
.
.
For Details►——➤ http://Www.Smartwork1.com