Sort It Out on Your Own: The Winning Argument of Israel's Opponents in America

Amir Bogan, a US resident, analyzes the winning argument of Israel's opponents in America: redirecting aid money to local needs. He quotes Abdul El-Sayed, a Democratic Senate candidate from Michigan, who opposes military aid to Israel and prefers funding healthcare, education, and infrastructure. Bogan argues that most Americans are indifferent to Israel but concerned about the cost of living, and describes broad support for ending aid, including among various figures from right and left.

In an opinion column, Amir Bogan, a US resident, presents the central argument of Israel's opponents in America: prioritizing local needs over military aid to Israel. He focuses on Abdul El-Sayed, a physician and Democratic Senate candidate from Michigan, who expressed opposition to unconditional military support for any country, including Israel, and emphasized the right of American citizens to their tax money. Bogan quotes El-Sayed saying that the primary responsibility is to fund healthcare, schools, and roads in Michigan instead of sending money to a foreign government. He notes that El-Sayed views the Israeli government as an apartheid regime and accuses it of genocide. Bogan argues that most Americans are indifferent to Israel but concerned about the cost of living, health insurance, and cuts to social services. He links anger over rising fuel prices to the war with Iran, seen as an initiative by Netanyahu. He describes broad support for ending aid, including from various figures such as Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Vice President J.D. Vance. Bogan concludes that popular opposition to the Washington establishment is growing, and there is agreement that the US cannot continue to fund Israel.