"US Republicans consider health care cuts to fund Iran war" - https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/us-republicans-consider-he...
A reminder Israel has both universal healthcare and tuition free university...and voted yesterday to give $255 million to ultra-Orthodox programs and institutions, including yeshivas...that actually refuse to engage in military conscription...
https://www.timesofisrael.com/opposition-mks-voted-to-alloca...
This is both wrong and off topic.
Israel health care is funded by a 5% additional income tax tier. non working people pay a significant fixed annual fee.
University is not free. $5K for the public institutions - which have limited admissions. $10K for many of the spill over private institutions.
Now - about those space lasers ....
5k is far from nothing, it is more than enough in any country than subsidize higher education.
Which is most of the world at this point.
I don't think you have to wait for 2026 on that one.
This also applies to US aid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Israel#State_of_...
"At the end of 1948, 53% of Israel's Jewish population was insured, about 80% of them by Clalit, with a few small health funds insuring the remainder. In the following years, Israel's healthcare system was expanded, and within a decade, about 90% were insured."
Universal healthcare became a thing in 1995, it seems.
"I stand behind the Israeli soldiers; whether there are children or women, it doesn't matter to me if there is damage. There are no innocent civilians in Jenin" - https://www.instagram.com/reel/DWWUmuFDgqP/
US is already very unpopular even among the traditionally very pro-US populations, which means anyone not distancing themselves from US will underperform and in many cases pro-US politicians will be ousted.
These posts are getting flagged but its actually vey relevant for US tech as US tech may end up blocked across the world with potentially reducing its userbase by %90 percent as US population quite small actually.
I guess we've obliterated two schools now. Ugh.
> The Feb. 28 attack occurred the same day as a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile struck a school in the city of Minab, several hundred miles away, killing 175 people. In the case of Lamerd, though, it involved a weapon that had been untested in combat.
edit: Strike the rest.
People are now joking about Iran deploying inflatable schools as decoy so to make US spent their bombs on those.
It's crazy that we recognize country's right to determine the use of their own airspace??? Are you serious?
They host two US bases with significant air assets (in Seville and Cadiz). Pretty sure those agreements don't say "And you can tell us what to do with our defense assets whenever you want".
Of course they do.
https://es.usembassy.gov/agreement-on-defense-cooperation/
"To this end, Spain grants to the United States of America the use of operational and support installations and grants authorizations for use of Spanish territory, territorial sea and airspace for purposes within the bilateral or multilateral scope of this Agreement. Any use beyond these purposes will require the prior authorization of the Government of Spain."
"Aircraft flying logistics missions, operated by or for the United States forces, other than those in paragraph 1, not carrying VIPs, HAZMAT or cargo or passengers that might be controversial to Spain may overfly, enter or exit Spanish airspace and use the bases specified in Annex 2 on quarterly blanket overflight clearances authorized by the Permanent Committee."
But the US not being allowed to use the bases it pays and maintains for Spain makes it questionable why it does so in the first place. Iran is in fact a threat relevant to NATO considering most of it is/was within ballistic missile range. It's also a simple fact that Iran's manufacturing base has been supporting Russia's war machine, which has been a key contributing factor in the Ukrainian stalemate. There is some genuine strategic overlap.
Restricting air space on top of that, makes me, originally a more sympathetic American NATO supporter, question the dynamics here. Why should the US help Spain when it's in need in a future conflict?
I don't want Isreal dragging us into wars for it's personal benefit. But this whole conflict has really got me realizing I don't want Europe dragging us into any wars either. The only transactional benefit to those air bases is that they power American global logistics. If this becomes a pattern then I think NATO will likely become nothing more than a nuclear umbrella, even after Trump leaves office. And only as a hedge against nuclear proliferation.
People take for granted that Biden was technically the most Pro-NATO president we have ever had, and likely ever will.
Why lie like this? I linked the agreement; the US doesn't maintain everything.
"Each Party shall bear the costs of operation and maintenance of services and installations, or parts thereof, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article which it uses exclusively, as well as the identifiable direct costs for its use of jointly used installations and general services of the base."
"The bases listed in Annex 2 of this Agreement shall be under Spanish command... Consistent with the provisions of Article Sixteen, the security of each base shall be the responsibility of the Commander of the each base... The functioning and maintenance of general services and installations of the base, and the management of provisioning for these services and installations shall be the responsibility of the Commander of the base, who shall assure to the United States forces the availability-of these services and installations under conditions which guarantee the operations of United States units. To discharge this responsibility and promptly and effectively resolve any contingency, the Commander of the base will seek the collaboration of the United States forces. The general services and installations of a base are those which characterize it as such and are essential to the operability of the units."
> Restricting air space on top of that, makes me, originally a more sympathetic American NATO supporter, question the dynamics here. Why should the US help Spain when it's in need in a future conflict?
The Iran War is one of aggression, and Spain justifiably wants to be left out of it. https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/coll...
NATO is a defensive alliance, and specific to... the North Atlantic in theory. (In fact, Hawaii isn't even covered under the NATO setup. https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/29/us/nato-treaty-hawaii-intl-hn...)
The only country in history to invoke Article 5 was the US after 9/11. Spain stepped up, as expected of it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_casualties_in_Afghan...
The coalition for Afghanistan was voluntary. This isn't even that, it's just flying our planes over Spain's airspace.
Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.
> After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allies invoked Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, the collective-defense clause, for the first time in NATO's history.
No LLM needed, nor used. Direct from the US State Department!
> Even as a joint contributor I see no reason for the US to pay for bases it's never going to be allowed to use.
It continues to be able to use them. It has never been allowed to use them for things Spain finds objectionable.
I'm not clear on how a semantic quibble that amounts to "Spain and the rest of Europe proactively affirmed their Article 5 obligations to the US" helps your case here. You have, if anything, effectively demonstrated Spain's commitment to the agreement.
> The United States has never activated article 5
The US didn't activate it. It was:
> The decision to invoke NATO's collective self-defense provisions was undertaken at NATO's own initiative, without a request by the United States
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NATO_Article_5_contingenc...
Regardless, article 5 was activated _on behalf_ of the US, if not at the US's request.
Which isn't the situation being imposed by Spain. They're being told they can't use the airspace for one specific military action. They maintain use of their bases in other ways (training, presumably ship refueling, maintenance, etc). They may be able to use the airspace for _other_ military actions in the future.
And of course, the US bases are guests in Spain, a favor the Spanish are doing for their friends. They're still expected to follow their hosts rules.