“So their funding both sides.
Does not make sense !”
I think you’re looking at this from a perspective that is not the US government’s perspective. Even claiming it’s the government’s perspective is probably wrong. That would imply that our present government has some clear goal or objective that various functionaries think would benefit the US government and the interests of the US people. While I believed that was happening during the Trump administration, I don’t believe it is possible when the Democrats are laser focused on simply maintaining power at any cost. You get a sense of “the government’s” priorities when their military recruitment videos are replayed the world over as parodies. When we’ve reached a point when it’s impossible to parody the government’s actions, it’s also impossible to believe they have any kind of sensible policy towards any person, government, group or idea.
In this context, the objective of any gift, sale or transfer is not to help or support one side or idea over another. It’s to gain whatever political benefit that giving the money or support can gain you at home. Does anyone believe that there’s one wit of sympathy or support from the present US officialdom for either side?
The way this works is, competing interests go to the Administration and broker a deal. You give 75 million dollars (a portion of which will find its way back to my pocket by proxy) to XYZ and I’ll give your sister-in-law a partnership in our law firm. Oh, and a half million signing bonus. The manufacturer of rockets offers a break on the cost of another product if he gets a lucrative no bid on Iron Dome missiles. That way whoever negotiates the other contract can claim a couple of brownie points, and, possible a post government job. There are a lot voices at a lot of levels involved in this. All we see are a few headlines that really don’t reflect what’s going on at all.
If you’re looking for sense, or consistency, or a general purpose, it’s probably not there to find.
As I was working, I remembered a quote from Daniel Patrick Moynihan. I think he was the final honest Democrat.* It goes, “Politics is all about who gets how much and when. Nothing else matters.” I think it encapsulates our discussion. The policy, whether, to support Israel or the Palestinians, is nowhere on the politicians’ horizon. That’s why their decisions make no sense. When we look at their decisions, we seek an underlying policy or desire for some particular outcome. But that doesn’t appear because it’s not there to find. The desired outcome for the politicians was whatever they got in exchange for their decision. We, as observers, don’t see that unless, as in Abscam**, it is revealed to us by a surveillance camera.
* My father, a WWII vet and a hard working man, was a Democrat. Then, along came Carter and he became a Republican. He was a proud American and he said, “I didn’t leave the Democratic party. They left me.” My dad and his Democrat friends were wonderful people; a separate species from what we see today. Honest, hard working ..,pro American. Today, they’d all be far, far right Republicans.
** Abscam, where the FBI filmed sitting senators stuffing money down their pants, changed how politics works. Now, it’s all done by third parties who say things like, “Yeah, ten percent goes to the big guy.”