Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84351 
Subject: Re: Bibi and Hezbullah
Date: 09/23/24 5:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 5
You’ve offered a range of motives for why Bibi might start a war without addressing why the goal of intervening in the US election isn’t one of them. The Democratic Party has an ambiguous relationship with conservatives in Israel and even with Kamala in office the Israeli state has to be concerned about how far she can support them politically.

Trump, on the other had, has no qualms about supporting the most militant racists in the settler movement. Given this, the war with Hezbullah makes a lot of sense in pushing against the fissures in the Democratic Party political alliance.


It barely has any impact in pushing against the Democratic Party alliance - in fact, I think it helps the Democrats. Hezbollah is less connected to the cause of Palestinian statehood, and more transparently a projection of Iranian military hegemony in the region, than Hamas (much less conflict in the West Bank). Engaging with Lebanon is more likely to help Harris than hurt her, because it distracts away from the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It's far easier - and defensible for Democrats - to justify sending arms to Israel to fight against Hezbollah than to fight in Gaza. The more they can talk about things going on in the region other than bombings in Gaza, the better for them. At worst it's somewhat of a wash for Democrats.

That's why the domestic factors I raised are so much more significant. They launched now because they were about to lose a once-in-a-generation tactical coup against Hezbollah's personnel and communications network. It's politically beneficial domestically to Netanyahu to show movement in the war right around 10/7, especially given that Israel had to abandon a big chunk of territory up along the Lebanese border.

It would be silly for Netanyahu to base the decision whether to launch or not based on something as minor as an indirect and potentially trivial impact on the U.S. election - one that could just as easily be a benefit to the Democrats as the Republicans - rather than the far more significant direct impacts on his own country.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (25) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community