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.

  • orrk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    when exactly did you feel like international law meant something, and what events made you feel so? genuinely would like to know

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      27 minutes ago

      But it isn’t even international law, these are domestic laws forbidding sending weapons to nations that interfere with US humanitarian aid that have been flouted repeatedly and with the barest semblance of an excuse made. I can see them not paying attention to UN “laws” but this isnt the same thing.

    • reksas@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      I thought it meant something, as they bothered to even pretend there is international law by having one in first place.

    • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Growing up in America there’s definitely an initial feeling of “law and order” ruling many of America’s past with interfering in other countries affairs, eventually you learn about the fucked up shit if you actually start looking though lol.

      I remember I did a presentation in middle school about Operation Paperclip and most of the class thought I was making it up lol.