US president reiterates support for Israel in call with Netanyahu amid reports that he is also opposed to counterattack.

US President Joe Biden has condemned Iranian attacks on military facilities in Israel, pledging a coordinated Group of Seven (G7) diplomatic response while highlighting the United States’s help in taking down “nearly all” of the attacking drones and missiles.

Biden, who cut short a trip to Delaware and returned to Washington, DC to meet advisers over the late Saturday night attack, said in a statement released by the White House that the US forces and facilities had not been hit.

The US president said he reiterated the “ironclad” support for Israel’s security in a call with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with whom he has had strained relations over Israel’s handling of the war in Gaza.

“Tomorrow, I will convene my fellow G7 leaders to coordinate a united diplomatic response to Iran’s brazen attack,” he said.

“And while we have not seen attacks on our forces or facilities today, we will remain vigilant to all threats and will not hesitate to take all necessary action to protect our people,” he said.

Archive link

    • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
      0·
      7 months ago

      This is not controversial, feel free to do a second of research. And Biden had the vaccine too, he really just killed so many.

      • EvilBit@lemmy.world
        0·
        7 months ago

        Holy shit you’re bad at this. “Let me make a broad and extraordinary claim and it’s on you to prove it.”

        Here’s why your rebuttal sucks and you’re bad at thinking:

        1. You have never heard of “burden of proof”.
        2. Biden wasn’t president when COVID was killing a million Americans, so your point is not just vague, it’s stupid.
        3. You ignored all my other points completely.
        4. Your only defense was completely unsourced whataboutism.
        5. You think claiming “it’s not controversial” is like a cheat code for arguments.
        6. Your fundamental “hellscape” argument relies on a definition of badness that is so impossibly narrow and dismissive that you’re basically claiming that Trump would only be a bad president if people were literally suffering and dying in the streets in such numbers that everyone had no excuse not to realize it, which utterly invalidates everything any human could do in a presidential term unless they literally went full Hitler.

        Looking forward to your trenchant and scholarly “no u” rebuttal.

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              0·
              7 months ago

              Because if you dont want to do a basic google search I dont give a shit what you have to say because it will just be a unthinking waste of my time.

              • EvilBit@lemmy.world
                0·
                7 months ago

                You read enough to get to the part where I pointed out “burden of proof” and ignored it completely. You’re a bad faith actor and an intellectually dishonest troll. I owe you nothing. It’s not on me to google shit, especially your insane and vague claim.