All it takes to be an antisemite these days is to question why we give Israel so much money.

Of course that’s not all it takes. In fact, it’s a question I’ve asked, too: why so much aid? But when I researched it, I found that the answer made perfect sense.

Before I give the answer, I’ll mention Keith’s second comment today on the subject, after various people responded negatively:

How to prove a point without really trying. Israel firsters are in the room. And your wrong ,we should not give any money to any country. If Israel can have free education and health care, they can pay their own way. ,,flame away

Now, if Keith had led with “we should not give any money to any country,” that would have been a different point and a different argument or discussion. That discussion could be on the purpose of foreign aid, whether it fulfills its purpose, and the merits and/or flaws of the financially isolationist approach (does this include no bases anywhere outside the US, for example?). But that would be switching the argument and is quite different from focusing on US aid to Israel. Plus, of course, one can favor foreign aid for Israel without being an “Israel Firster”: one can believe, for example, that giving aid to Israel is extremely helpful to the US itself.

Any discussion of actual dollar amounts without background about how the aid is given and what is done with it is to leave out almost everything important. So let’s fill in those blanks.

First, a very short summary version:

Next, a longer version. Some excerpts:

Israel is America’s strongest ally in the Middle East. The two nations are bound together not only by interests, but also by the deeply held values they share.

Israel provides a cost-effective alternative to stationing American troops in the region. …

Israel is a major economic and technological ally. Many American companies including Google, Microsoft, Apple, IBM, and Intel operate major research facilities in Israel, and Israel creates hundreds of thousands of jobs in America through trade, investment, and other cooperation. U.S. aid helps Israel defend itself so it can remain a valuable contributor to the American economy.

By 2028, Israel must spend 100% of American aid money on American defense contractors. This spending supports well over 20,000 jobs according to recent estimates.

Israel is talking about phasing out US military aid, so perhaps that 2028 benchmark won’t be reached and the amount of aid will be minuscule or zero. But Israel already gives back a great deal of its aid anyway. Here’s how it works:

In the 2000s, as Israel became more economically self-sufficient, economic aid has dropped off to zero in recent years. Military assistance, meanwhile, has steadily risen to levels of typically over $4 billion annually over the past year.

Most U.S. security assistance to Israel falls under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program.

Israel is a recipient of U.S. FMF, which functions as a grant that a foreign country then must use to purchase weapons and other military platforms manufactured in the United States. …

While Israel uses FMF to make most arms purchases from the U.S., it often buys additional defense articles using its own funds. As of April 2025 Israel had over 750 active FMS cases, valued at $39.2 billion. …

The United States has recognized Israel as a major non-NATO ally since 1987, and bilateral defense cooperation also includes an array of strategic agreements, joint research and development programs, intelligence sharing, and frequent combined training exercises. …

The emphasis on maintaining Israel’s QME [Qualitative Military Edge] is an acknowledgment that—notwithstanding its impressive military and technological capabilities—Israel has several strategic disadvantages vis-à-vis its adversaries, including its limited size and manpower.

Israel does more than give back its aid for the purpose of buying US armaments – which means the money flows back to the US – and it does more than fight US enemies in the Middle East (terrorist entities controlled by Iran, for the most part). Israel also develops weapons and shares these gains with the US:

From tank protection systems to artificial intelligence-powered warfare solutions, Israeli defense firms and research institutions have consistently delivered cutting-edge innovations that have found their way into the American military. Many of these technologies were born out of Israel’s unique security challenges and its need for rapid innovation in urban and asymmetric warfare. The US military has adopted many of Israel’s systems and integrated them into combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and various counterterrorism operations worldwide.

While Israeli innovations have shaped military doctrine and force structures, they have also had a direct impact on individual warfighters, as seen in battlefield medical advancements. The Emergency Bandage—a simple yet highly effective hemorrhage control dressing developed by an Israeli military medic—has saved countless American lives. First introduced in the 1990s, the bandage features a built-in pressure applicator that allows soldiers to treat severe wounds with one hand. …

The Israeli military’s adaptation of the D9 bulldozer into a heavily armored combat bulldozer offered a battlefield-tested model that directly influenced American operations in Iraq. …

Israeli advancements in force protection have dramatically increased the survivability of armored platforms in combat. The Trophy Active Protection System (APS) is one of the most significant Israeli contributions to armored warfare. …

Recognizing the increasing threat of modern anti-tank weapons, the US Army integrated the Trophy APS onto M1 Abrams main battle tanks beginning in 2018. …

Furthermore, as unmanned aerial threats evolve, the Trophy APS is now being adapted to counter drone-based attacks. …

Having faced IED threats for years from Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist organizations, Israel’s counter-IED capability far exceeded that of the United States. Israel shared these technologies with the United States, providing it with vehicle-mounted microwave devices called Dragon Spike and Dragon Spike II to test in Iraq and Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. These devices were not a silver bullet to the IED problem, but they did help jump-start the United States’ counter-IED efforts.

I’ve already quoted a lot from that site, so I’ll stop here because I believe I’ve made my point. But there’s plenty more at the link and I suggest you take a look. Suffice to say that I don’t think there’s a country on earth that helps the US more, militarily. I don’t think any other country is even close.

[ADDENDUM: And by the way, since Keith’s comments were originally on the Massie thread, I thought this would be a good place for a link to a post from Ace today on the topic of Massie’s “principles.”]

The post US aid to Israel appeared first on The New Neo.

Of interest:

It appears that Hamas’ latest bout of intractability has finally broken its patron’s back. After 20 years, Qatar is pulling its investment in the terror group. According to my sources, Doha will no longer play the role of host and negotiator, and most of Hamas’ leadership has… pic.twitter.com/ofIyhojCPj

— Amit Segal (@AmitSegal) April 27, 2026

The gist of it is that Hamas’ sponsor Qatar is withdrawing some of its support from Hamas, due to Hamas’ tepid response to the Iran War in which Iran decided on the brilliant move to attack Qatar.

The post Qatar isn’t so fond of Hamas at the moment appeared first on The New Neo.

Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Aragchi, has denied targeting his country’s neighbours, telling Al Jazeera: “We are not attacking our neighbours in the Persian Gulf countries, we are targeting the presence of the US in these countries. Neighbours should direct their grievances to the decision-makers of this war”.

Some of the damage to civilian infrastructure in the Gulf states is accidental – resulting from debris falling from intercepted missiles.

But not all.

The number of attacks on airports in Bahrain and the UAE point to more than coincidence.

Iran always made it clear in advance that, if it was attacked, it would retaliate at any country it considered to be complicit in that attack.

As one would imagine, the target states are not happy. Iran seems to want them to blame the US, but they’re not:

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expresses its rejection and condemnation in the strongest terms of the blatant and cowardly Iranian attacks that targeted the Riyadh Region and the Eastern Province, which were successfully intercepted. These attacks cannot be justified under any pretext,” the statement said.

This is not the first time Iran has attacked its Arab neighbours in the Gulf, either directly or indirectly, but never quite on this scale.

From where I sit – which is far, far away, and not privy to any special information – there’s been no great love lost between Iran and these countries even before these incidents. Although they’re all basically Muslim-majority states, Iran is a Shia country and the others are Sunni-majority countries with varying Shia populations, nations that have thrown their lot somewhat in with the US for years. If Iran’s decision to attack these countries seems counter-productive, it is probably nevertheless done because of a combination of pent-up anger (by an Iranian regime under great pressure), plus the notion that it might deter these states (or others) in the future from consorting with the US. If so, that doesn’t seem to have been a good bet:

The calls, led by the United Arab Emirates from inside the six-country Gulf Cooperation Council, are for the Arab states to act in self-defence against Iran, but it would be a huge step for Gulf leaders in effect to side with Israel in a war that will determine the future shape of the Middle East, probably to the advantage of Israel.

A video meeting of GCC foreign ministers on Sunday made no explicit reference to such a plan but stated the “option to respond to Iranian attacks” to protect regional security and stability remained on the table.

Iran had expended huge diplomatic effort in the past two years trying to convince the Gulf states that Israel, not Iran, is the chief destabilising force in the region, but much of that painstaking work in speeches, conferences, and diplomatic visits appears to have fallen apart in a matter of days.

The first article I linked and quoted is from the leftist BBC and the second is from the leftist Guardian. I don’t think it’s my imagination that both pieces seem more sympathetic to Iran than to any other country in the mix. But I don’t think Iran’s “huge diplomatic effort” was bearing fruit even before this; why would it?

I also wonder how much command and control is left in Iran. Who’s giving the orders? I don’t know, but these figures seem to be gone.

The post The Gulf states are not happy about being attacked by Iran appeared first on The New Neo.

Barry Meislin- Nah. If [the Democrats are] smart they’ll impeach [Trump] for this:

The UAE Quietly Poured a Half-Billion Dollars into Trump’s Crypto Venture Four Days Before Inauguration

Of course that means that they’ll probably impeach him for ICE or something stupid and political.

Anyway, I’m curious to know what the regulars think of Trump’s crypto business.

Here’s my response.

Remember when Trump and his family were debanked, during the time that they were also being attacked through lawfare? The left was trying to destroy their lives, including taking away their wealth.

The Trumps are on record as saying they got into crypto because they realized their money wasn’t safe in the banking system. See this:

“Every major banking institution, the people that, two weeks before we were debanked, we could’ve called and gotten a loan in five seconds. They disappeared. We were left high and dry,” he said.

“Basically, during the first term, certainly after the…let’s call it January 6… all the nonsense, it got significantly worse,” he said …

“We weren’t even early crypto guys, but we figured, if they can debank the Trump Organization, if they can debank us, who can’t they go after? And more importantly, who won’t they go after?” he continued.

Trump Jr. said that instead of going home and “go cry in a corner,” they decided to launch World Liberty Financial, which he described as the future of banking.

Read the whole article. One of the most interesting aspects of it is that, although it was written in the summer of 2025 when the facts of J6 were well known, it repeats these lies, including calling the mob on J6 “deadly”:

Five people, including one police officer, died and several more were injured when the pro-Trump mob breached the Capitol building.

The police officer, Sicknick, didn’t “die when the pro-Trump mob breached the Capitol building.” I’ve written many times about what really happened. Another was killed by the deadly Capitol Police, Of the other three, two died of heart attacks and one of those wasn’t ever at the Capitol but merely at the earlier rally. The third person of those three who died, Rosanne Boyland, was reported variously to have been beaten to death by police, to have been trampled in the crowd, and on autopsy to have died of an overdose. So the article is purposely misleading; what else is new?

As for the article you linked, about the UAE – I’m not at all in favor of that sort of thing. At the very least, it gives the appearance of corruption and certainly might be true corruption. However, I also agree with the writer of this comment at the article:

What [Andrew C. McCarthy, the piece’s author] fails to understand is the potential behind WLF. It very well could become the first crypto bank, which is more and more likely to be the future of currency. I’d also add that when you have lots of money to throw around…you throw it around. Maybe it’s for favor later or just to perhaps get lucky and make more money off the next big thing. There are also a lot of assumptions in this piece. For instance, the not naming of the UAE reps. on the board is supposedly for nefarious reasons – to hide them. OR, in typical Trump style, he wants his name on almost everything and doesn’t want others to get the credit. While I say all this, aren’t most big business and political dealings suspect at best? I feel like this is just how the world works these days…

And also this one:

It’s nice to have a leader who wants us to be proud of our country rather than ashamed of our past. I’m not at all surprised that he’s acting as one of the elite. He’s been one of the elite his entire life. He joins the ranks of Pelosi, Omar, Biden (and pretty much every other politician) in enriching himself through his position.

The UAE is actually one of the best of the Arab countries in terms of reforming the hatred it used to teach, by the way. Also, here’s a not-all-that-bad article in, of all places the Guardian. Excerpt:

Documents seen by the Journal indicate that Tahnoon paid the Trump family and entities affiliated with Steve Witkoff, co-founder of World Liberty and Trump’s envoy to the Middle East, half of the investment up front, with $187m going to Trump entities, and $31m going to Witkoff’s. The payment came from Aryam Investment, a Tahnoon-backed company.

A White House official said the president was “not involved in running his businesses and has turned them over to his children, so these business endeavors do not involve him”.

Claims that the president had breached the constitution’s federal emoluments clause, designed to safeguard against corruption, are “bogus and irrelevant”, the official argued. “Mere appearances of business deals with which he has no involvement plainly cannot violate the Emoluments clause.”

In a statement, the White House counsel, David Warrington, added: “President Trump performs his constitutional duties in an ethically sound manner and to suggest so otherwise is either ill-informed or malicious.”

Government ethics experts have long been alarmed over the way that Trump and his family structured his companies before he started his second term. Typically, a president puts his assets into a blind trust overseen by an independent third party. But Trump handed over control to two of his sons, Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump.

While it’s no different from how Trump structured his companies during his first term, Trump spent the years after he left the White House expanding his family business. Now Trump entities are dabbling in social media, streaming platforms, nuclear fusion, financial services and, through World Liberty, crypto. …

The Guardian has not identified evidence of the president explicitly offering the chip exports in exchange for the investment in his family’s crypto venture.

Richard Briffault, a law professor at Columbia, said while there was no direct allegation of a quid pro quo, “the situation of a major investment by a foreign power in a major company that the president has a major stake in, that creates a structural conflict of interest”.

“The concern is that we can never be sure why certain decisions are being made,” Briffault said. When Trump allowed the UAE to import AI chips, “it could have been a shrewd geopolitical move, or it could have been influenced by the fact that the country has a major investment in a Trump family business. We just can’t know for sure.”

Indeed. That’s why I believe the entire Trump family should have avoided even the appearance of corruption.

But it surprises me not at all that they have plunged into it. It’s one of the things I don’t like about Trump; there are others. But they are overshadowed by how much worse the Democrats are for the country (and the world) as a whole.

The post Trump, corruption, crypto, and the UAE appeared first on The New Neo.

“Tucker’s a friend of mine,” [Vance] told Ahmari. “And do I have disagreements with Tucker Carlson? Sure. I have disagreements with most of my friends, especially those who work in politics. You know this. Most people who know me know this. I’m [also] a very loyal person, and I am not going to get into the business of throwing friends under the bus.”

I had no idea that friends can’t be criticized when they lie publicly and often. “My friend, right or wrong” isn’t a principle of which I’m aware. When your friend is doing something mendacious and destructive, and it’s public and influential, it’s moral cowardice to say nothing.

Of course, this isn’t really about friendship. I think I’m on safe ground when I say that. Tucker Carlson isn’t all that charming. What’s happening here, I believe, is that Vance doesn’t want to alienate Carlson’s Jew-hating supporters. They vote too, right? I don’t know how numerous they are, But J. D. must believe they are numerous enough that he needs them in the coalition. It’s true that Vance and others are in a bind, if this group is large enough that it’s necessary for victory. But they’re going to alienate a lot of other people in the process, and not just Jews.

More from Vance:

Vance noted further that “the idea that Tucker Carlson — who has one of the largest podcasts in the world, who has millions of listeners, who supported Donald Trump in the 2024 election, who supported me in the 2024 election — the idea that his views are somehow completely anathema to conservatism, that he has no place in the conservative movement, is frankly absurd.”

Meanwhile, the latest from good old friend Tucker to help you make up your own mind as to whether Carlson has a place in “the conservative movement”:

Pernicious mendacious garbage. The Qataris must love it, though.

The post J. D. Vance ♥ Tucker Carlson appeared first on The New Neo.

I don’t see evidence for that description, although I know a lot of people believe it. It seems absurd to me that Trump didn’t expect what just about every blogger and commenter on the right expected – which is that Hamas would not comply with the deal and disarm, and probably would not cooperate in myriad other ways. I think it was always part of Trump’s expectation.

But the deal accomplished three very important things:

(a) It got some other Middle Eastern countries to commit to backing it. And they might end up being in non-compliance, too, although they have some economic incentives to fulfill their part of the deal.

(b) It got the hostages back at the outset. That was vitally important to untie Israel’s hands.

(c) It gave the world notice that it’s the Israelis who are willing to “give peace a chance.” It throws the spotlight on the continuing violence of Hamas, and if and when Israel has to go back to dealing with them harshly, Israel’s justification will be clear – not that most of the world will ever give them credit. I’ll add that the NeverNetayahu crowd in Israel will never give Bibi credit, either.

None of these things mean the deal will work out. But it’s part of the plan’s brilliance that it accomplishes these three things at once. Neither Trump, Kushner, Rubio, or Witcoff are naive enough to not understand the perils and risks, which are obvious. I doubt they are without a plan for contingincies, although they’re not telegraphing exactly what it is.

In other words, as this article says, “No one is under any illusions.” From the piece [emphasis mine]:

A total of 154 of the 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences or lengthy terms who were freed in the first stage of the hostage deal and the end of the war were transferred through the Rafah Crossing to Cairo. They are currently under Egyptian supervision in a hotel, in coordination with Israeli security officials. These prisoners, classified as deportees, are undergoing medical checks and receiving humanitarian support under the oversight of Red Cross representatives.

Meanwhile, Israeli intelligence continues to monitor those who have returned to their homes in the West Bank. “The terrorists understand that the situation has changed, but no one is under any illusion—they are not lovers of Zion,” a senior security official said. …

Palestinian sources estimate that some of the released prisoners may eventually settle in Turkey, Qatar, or other Arab states, while others are expected to remain in Egypt and rebuild their lives there. The 154 exiles are staying in a Cairo hotel under Egyptian security supervision, undergoing medical checks and humanitarian processing.

Turkey and Qatar have both expressed willingness to receive some of the released prisoners, though no official announcements have been made. Each prisoner’s destination was preapproved by Israel and included in the release agreement, and permission to remain in Cairo depends on the Egyptian authorities. …

Alongside the operational deployment, the IDF continues real-time intelligence collection and sensitive outreach to the families of released prisoners to prevent potential friction or violent incidents. Monitoring of the prisoners and their relatives will continue closely, with increased military presence in certain areas.

And that’s just what’s being reported. I’m going to assume there’s a lot more going on.

On many websites I’ve seen jokes about equipping the released prisoners with beepers. No, that’s not happened. But I wouldn’t underestimate the Israeli authorities and their creativity.

I repeat: all of this doesn’t mean everything will be as rosy as the rhetoric has been. But I don’t think that either the Israelis or Trump and his negotiators are naive about the nature of Hamas and the Palestinians.

The post Middle East pessimists versus Middle East optimists appeared first on The New Neo.

Breaking for the whole world today is the news that Hamas is agreeing to some of President Trump’s 20-point proposal to end the Gaza War, most notably the release of all hostages, living and dead.

Does this mean genuine peace or a hudna?

That is indeed the question.

More:

Hudna is an Arabic term for “calm” or “quiet.” But as our sometime friends at Grok point out, “In contemporary politics, it’s notably used by groups like Hamas to describe extended ceasefires in conflicts, such as the Israeli-Palestinian one, as a tactical pause rather than a permanent peace.”

That’s a polite definition. I’ve seen hudna defined as a deliberate deception designed to lull the enemy into complacency, especially in times of great danger, as Hamas is in at this moment from an impending Israeli attack that President Trump would have given his imprimatur.

Yes, but then again, Israel’s first goal is to get the hostages back. After that, if the Palestinians fail to live up to the terms …

More from Simon:

That strategy is to make everybody feel good for now in the hopes that it will continue to pay off and grow, so that Hamas can be maneuvered. It’s the Art of the Middle East Deal. …

We shall see what transpires. That is what President Trump, beneath all his hosannas, was saying subtextually. This is a test. And I suspect, if Hamas fails, he is prepared to act.

Who is the naive one here? I don’t think it’s either party. That is, I don’t think it’s any of the many parties, because other Middle Eastern countries are involved in this deal. As far as I can tell, dhimmi Western Europe is not.

And will the hostages actually be returned? I’m not optimistic even on that, but I could be wrong and I hope I’m wrong.

The post The Art of the Middle East Deal appeared first on The New Neo.

The post Something’s afoot in the Middle East appeared first on The New Neo.

(1) As Hamas fades, what group will rise? Of one thing you can be sure: it won’t be the equivalent of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Almost certainly, all the possible candidates are pretty awful. Which are the least awful? Perhaps this bunch, which Israel is said to be arming in order to help protect the aid distribution:

The concept of using Yasser Abu Shabab’s militia was approved because it was already an existing, anti-Hamas armed group independent of Israeli assistance. Contrary to some reports, it is not connected to ISIS or extremist Salafi groups.

Notably, the militia was already armed prior to the current conflict. Members of the militia, all from the same tribe, have long opposed Hamas’ rule in the area. The militia has been defined as an armed group even before the start of the war.

In the Rafah area, very few terrorists remain, and most of the terror infrastructure has been dismantled. This improved security situation now allows for easier control of the area without Hamas governance.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend? Not necessarily.

(2) Israel detains the self-aggrandizing publicity hound, Greta Thunberg – who is no longer a teenager – and one condition of her release is that she will be watching the video of Hamas atrocities. I doubt it will make a particle of difference to her:

Her boat carried less than one truck-full of food, which she claimed she was bringing to Gaza to stop the genocide.

They needed all that space for their videocameras, phones, and make-up kits.

(3) Macron changes his tune – somewhat – on Palestinian statehood:

An international conference, the brainchild of France, to recognize a Palestinian state, has lowered its sights.

Scheduled for June 16-18 at United Nations headquarters in New York, it will now focus on determining steps toward recognition rather than recognition itself.

The redefined goal signals a retreat from the conference’s earlier ambition of seeing a large bloc of countries, including France and the United Kingdom, recognize a Palestinian state, The Guardian reported on June 7.

French President Emmanuel Macron said recognizing “Palestine” “was not only a moral duty but a political necessity,” speaking during a press conference in Singapore on May 30.

Europe is hopelessly lost on this issue as well as on so many others. And it’s not as though Europe has a stellar past record, either.

(4) Speaking of which, here’s a video on why Ireland is so rabidly anti-Israel.

(5) Iran claims to have some secret Israeli nuclear intelligence:

The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Monday that the information Iran claimed it seized regarding Israel’s nuclear program “seems to refer” to the country’s Soreq Nuclear Research Center, the first acknowledgment outside of Tehran of the theft.

The Prime Minister’s Office had no immediate response to the remarks by IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, who spoke during a news conference in Vienna.

The alleged theft comes at a time of renewed tensions over Iran’s nuclear program, which enriches uranium a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels and looks poised to reject a US proposal over a possible deal on its atomic program.

The post Meanwhile, in the Middle East appeared first on The New Neo.

President Trump is first and foremost a businessman, and he sees things through that lens. He went to the Middle East to do business, to talk business, to make deals, and the leaders of the Arab nations he has visited, including most notably Saudi Arabia, seem to be reacting very positively to his approach.

That’s basically it. Whether these deals will end up being good, or will matter in any but the economic sense, remains to be seen. After all, “experts” thought that doing business with China would make China less of a threat, and so far it hasn’t quite worked out that way. It’s just a different kind of threat than it used to be.

On the other hand, I’ve read a ton of articles indicating these deals mean that Trump is pulling away from his support of Israel. I don’t see it that way. I’ve seen no real indication of it, and people such as Rubio and Huckabee certainly deny it. And, for example, Trump delivered this message to Iran while on his trip:

Speaking at a business roundtable in the Qatari capital Doha, Trump reiterated that Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon” and suggested that negotiators are “getting very close to maybe doing a deal.” …

During his Gulf tour, Trump has repeatedly warned that Iran must never obtain a nuclear weapon, threatening to strike the country if it fails to reach a nuclear deal. But he has not explicitly ruled out Iran enriching uranium on its own soil. While uranium is used as a nuclear fuel, it can be weaponized if enriched to high levels. …

In an interview with Breitbart last week, US foreign envoy Steve Witkoff said that an enrichment program in Iran is a “red line” for the US.

Plus he repeated his proposal for Gaza:

The president repeated his proposal for America to take over the enclave while speaking at a business roundtable in Doha with top Qatari officials on Thursday.

Trump said: “If it’s necessary, I think I’d be proud to have the United States have it, take it, make it a freedom zone. Let some good things happen, put people in homes where they can be safe and Hamas is going to have to be dealt with.

The post Trump gets down to business in the Arab world appeared first on The New Neo.