The group urged the DOJ to impanel a grand jury to investigate and potentially indict Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

The call from Veterans for Peace (VFP) comes days after the investigative outlet ProPublica published a detailed account of how the U.S. State Department submitted a report to Congress that contradicted the findings of the department’s own experts and those of other agencies.

The Blinken-led State Department’s May report concluded that Israel was not “prohibiting or otherwise restricting the transport or delivery of U.S. humanitarian assistance,” despite internal assessments from State Department experts and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) arguing that Israel had deliberately impeded American aid shipments to Gaza and that weapons transfers to the country should be cut off in line with Section 620I of the U.S. Foreign Assistance Act.

VFP’s letter came days after the U.S. and Israel reached a deal for an additional $8.7 billion in American military support, even as the Israeli military continues to obstruct aid deliveries in Gaza, bombard the enclave’s starving population, and expand the assault on Lebanon.

Susan Schnall, VFP’s president, said Monday that U.S. military aid to Israel amounts to “a theft from millions of Americans who have none of the health insurance every Israeli enjoys; from millions of Americans living in horrific housing while Israel builds thousands of upscale homes on land stolen from Palestinians; from millions of young Americans who can’t afford college because America’s top priorities are weapons and death, not human needs.”

  • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldOP
    66·
    3 months ago

    Their link under Read More goes into more details. Arguing that it’s unreasonable because Putin has no genuine interest in peace is a valid criticism. But it’s disingenuous to say Veterans for Peace is advocating for Ukraine to accede to Russian demands.

    Quotes

    First, an immediate ceasefire–an end to the fighting. That will require Russia to immediately pull back its troops and weapons out of Ukraine.

    But negotiations mean that both sides need to give something. So NATO and the U.S. should agree to pull back heavy weapons and missiles away from the Russian border and recognize in public what NATO has long acknowledged privately: that Ukraine will not be joining the military alliance in any foreseeable future.

    New negotiations, organized by combinations of the United Nations and the broad Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (which includes Russia, Ukraine, most European countries, and the United States) could move further towards renewing lapsed European arms control treaties and eventually towards full nuclear disarmament across Europe.

    After Horrific Invasion, ‘Diplomacy Not War’ Must Be More Than a Slogan

    • cygnus@lemmy.ca
      83·
      3 months ago

      But negotiations mean that both sides need to give something. So NATO and the U.S. should agree to pull back heavy weapons and missiles away from the Russian border and recognize in public what NATO has long acknowledged privately: that Ukraine will not be joining the military alliance in any foreseeable future.

      This is absolutely playing into Russia’s hands, and is essentially imperialist. What right do Russia’s government (and American veterans) have to decide what Ukrainians get to do with their own country?

      • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldOP
        46·
        3 months ago

        I would think letting Russia keep Ukrainian land would be playing into Russias hands. What are you proposing? This seems like the most realistic way to end the war and return Ukrainian territory rightfully to Ukraine.

        Edit: can someone explain why I’m being downvoted? An unconditional surrender by Russia would be great, but I don’t see how that can be accomplished

        • macarthur_park@lemmy.world
          41·
          3 months ago

          Russia desperately doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO or further their ties to the west. Agreeing to those terms plays direct into Russia’s hands.

          There is a wide gap between “Russia stops their invasion and pulls their forces out of Ukraine” and “unconditional surrender by Russia.” No one is calling for the latter, the former is a very reasonable outcome.

          • Keeponstalin@lemmy.worldOP
            21·
            3 months ago

            I agree that it’s reasonable for Ukraine to have a defensive pact and that Russia’s invasion completely justifies the need for a defensive pact in Europe. I just don’t see how they’ll agree to it from a geopolitical standpoint if their concern, justified or not, is Moscow being within range of US nukes. I think a different defensive pact without US hegenomy could satisfy every European countries security needs, but I don’t know how realistic that is either