On Wednesday, Sanders introduced six resolutions blocking six sales of different weapons contained within the $20 billion weapons deal announced by the Biden administration in August. The sales include many of the types of weapons that Israel has used in its relentless campaign of extermination in Gaza over the past year.

“Sending more weapons is not only immoral, it is also illegal. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and the Arms Export Control Act lay out clear requirements for the use of American weaponry – Israel has egregiously violated those rules,” said Sanders. “There is a mountain of documentary evidence demonstrating that these weapons are being used in violation of U.S. and international law.”

This will be the first time in history that Congress has ever voted on legislation to block a weapons sale to Israel, as the Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project pointed out. This is despite the U.S. having sent Israel over $250 billion in military assistance in recent decades, according to analyst Stephen Semler, as Israel has carried out ethnic cleansings and massacres across Palestine and in Lebanon.

The resolutions are not likely to pass; even if they did pass the heavily pro-Israel Congress, they would likely be vetoed by President Joe Biden, who has been insistent on sending weapons to Israel with no strings attached.

However, Sanders’s move is in line with public opinion. Polls have consistently found that the majority of the public supports an end to Israel’s genocide; a poll by the Institute for Global Affairs released this week found, for instance, that a majority of Americans think the U.S. should stop supporting Israel or make support contingent on Israeli officials’ agreement to a ceasefire deal. This includes nearly 80 percent of Democrats.

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Well, he was also a part of blocking the military aid to Ukraine for all those months. But this one is good

      • NateNate60@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        Hot take: Global geopolitics within the current rules as we understand it don’t allow for countries to genuinely respect each other as equals. Might will always be right on the global stage regardless of whether it should be that way. So when it comes to picking a global hegemon, the United States is really not a terrible choice compared with the alternatives.

        • escapesamsara@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ukraine is not, objectively could not qualify before 2014 when it became good for the US war machine for them to qualify, and most importantly, NATO should’ve disbanded in 1991 when the sole reason for its existence fell.

          • drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, our country is shitty. I get the main reason the US joined the allies had more to do with politics then ideology. But least some kind of good comes from the US backing ukraine.

          • boonhet@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 months ago

            1991 when the sole reason for its existence fell

            Russia still exists so what are you on about?

            The soviet union doesn’t, but the power was always concentrated into Russia, and guess what, Russia wants their territory back now. The countries which existed under the USSR and never want Russian rule again? Russia sees them as rightfully theirs. I for one am glad to have NATO protection. And I’m glad something is being done to help our brothers in Ukraine, because they weren’t as lucky as we were, to join the EU and NATO.