zlacker

>>anigbr+(OP)
Some of this information war seems to be intended from keeping the US from considering a third option - sitting this one out. One U.S. State Department official resigned over this when he saw Israel's weapons shopping list.[1]

The US could provide humanitarian aid, but not military aid. Cut military aid to Israel. Maybe still provide Iron Dome reloads, but that's about it. Bring in a hospital ship off Gaza, to care for the injured. Send a few frigates to protect it from all parties. Discourage outside interference. Then wait to see how this plays out. It's not the US's fight, after all.

Creating a lot of noise over the issue tends to force people to choose a side and eliminates middle options. That may be part of the intent of this campaign. "Are you with us, or against us". No, we're fed up with both of you.

[1] https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/why-a-sta...

>>Animat+IG
AFAIK, US cannot just "sit out", because the Israel-Palestine conflict can negatively impact the US-Saudi relationship. Even though Saudi shares some common interests with Israel (i.e. Iran), it simply can't look away from the sufferings of Muslims in Palestine, given its role as a major power in the Islamic world.

Also, if Israel takes the control of the Gaza Strip, a lot of refugees will spread in the region, creating more tension in the long-term. I deem this more sensitive than the religious strife, because it can leave concrete, direct, and explicit marks on the neighboring societies.

I think the best scenario for US is that Israel eventually stands down and falls back to the pre-war state - that is, no Israel control over the Palestinian territories. Israel won't have much choice here.

>>esjeon+jC1
> the US-Saudi relationship.

Less of an issue than it used to be. The US is now a net oil exporter.[1]

[1] https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-produc...