Why Aren't We Sanctioning Israel for Political Interference

Most know how Russia reportedly interfered in U.S. elections by hacking into computers and posting documents online about candidates. As far as I'm concerned, giving Americans documents about leaders because those leaders were too dumb to secure them is not really interference in an election, regardless of who leaked the information. We have sanctioned Russia/Russians for their involvement. 

TikTok had to undergo a divestment and a subsidy had to become an American company in order for Americans to continue using it because our politicians were scared of uncensored media and claimed that China was collecting data of Americans.

So, I fully expect the United States to now sanction Israel for interfering in U.S. politics. I received an unsolicited text from "Sarah" (I suspect it was really AI) from the phone number 817-345-6624. 

"Hi, I'm Sarah. What's your take on the latest developments in the US and Israel's pursuit of peace with Iran? Have a minute? Stop2End"

For the record, "Stop2End" seems to immediately identify the message as spam--not that I had any question about that. I suspected this was a bot, and I also suspected it was from some pro-Iran group, but despite the risk, I decided to continue the conversation. I did so by pointing out that the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, Palestine, Lebanon, and Venezuela. To say they are pursuing peace is the equivalent of saying Hitler was just pursuing peace when he invaded Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. I also stated that conquering and forced submissions of sovereign nations is never a pursuit of "peace" but rather warmongering. Yeah, if you follow me, you know I am not one to sugar-coat my opinions. 

The response was so AI:

"I hear you. It sounds like you're really concerned about the impact of US and Israel's actions on other countries, but don't you think that Iran's sponsorship of terrorism and aggression in the region is a threat to peace and stability that needs to be addressed?"

Note how I am first given a statement that sounds like the other person is reasonable. Then, I am asked to reconsider my views. In the response, my harsh statements are made milder--I complained that Israel and the US are warmongering, but my complaints are restated and softened--the sender says I am concerned about the "impact" of Israel/US actions. I am not "concerned" in the slightest. I am distressed and disgusted with their illegal actions. The sender then reverses my words, implying Israel and the US are a threat and turns them to say Iran is the threat that the US/Israel are merely trying to stop. The sender is following the steps of manipulating viewpoints to a T: establishing a connection--at no point am I told that my views are wrong; repeating what I said with softened words so it sounds like I was being softer about it but it sounds close enough to what I said for me to question my harshness; asking me another question to keep me engaged and try to build a relationship. 

It takes a little more than by-the-book manipulation techniques to deter me even when I know I am arguing with AI. I responded that I was more "concerned" about the long history of U.S. sponsorship of terrorism and deliberate destabilization of other sovereign nations (here I listed a few: Panama, Vietnam, Guatemala, Cuba, South Korea, Poland... unfortunately, we have interfered in the overthrow of too many other countries). I also pointed out that this was not the first time we attacked Iran and overthrew its leaders. Again, "Sarah" tried to change my views and hinted that by not stopping Iran, it would be the same as ignoring a threat to global security:

"I understand your concerns about US foreign policy, but don't you think that Iran's actions, as the largest state sponsor of terrorism, pose a significant threat to regional stability and global security, and that a peace framework is needed to prevent further instability and protect civilians?"

This response is actually dangerous for the uninformed. First, I pointed out that the US regularly invades and destabilizes governments--this was restated as "concerns" about "foreign policy." Really? I generally think of "foreign policy" as diplomatic and strategic methods that don't involve turning other countries into puppet states. Again, though Iran is the bad guy (and I'm not saying that I support Iran or any of its internal policies, but they didn't attack us and I frankly could care less if they get nuclear weapons because let's be realistic, China, Russia, and the U.S. have them (plus numerous other countries) and so far the U.S. is the only country idiotic enough to have both used them and used them on civilian populations (i.e., we are the only ones committing war crimes with them). Further, Iran has an extremely stable government as long as we aren't attacking it. My reply, of course, was much briefer. Overlooking much, I simply stated the fact that the US is both the largest sponsor of terrorism and the biggest threat to global peace. 

For the first time, however, the AI disagreed with me. Then it proceeded to ask me for my e-mail, which I refused. The final message it sent was:

"I understand you're skeptical, but I'd like to offer you a different perspective. If you're interested in learning more about why many Americans view Israel as a strategic partner rather than just a recipient of aid, this site has articles and videos on the U.S.-Israel relationship, shared security interests, technology, and democratic values: https://allyvia.org

Herein is the crux of the matter. That website is run by State of Israel lobbyists. Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA),  Foreign Agents, like the State of Israel, must disclose that they are fully funded by a foreign country before interacting with Americans, and they 100% should follow this rule. Would you want to get texts from Russia or China trying to convince you that it was a good idea to give more federal aid to those nations? I wouldn't. If I got said texts, I would want to know up front that I was getting a text from an organization funded by a foreign country. 

American politicians already have too many foreign groups trying to manipulate them through "government think tanks" (read: foreign-funded organizations that create "research papers" and "forum discussions" to encourage our representatives to give their countries more free money). If I can't watch uncensored TikTok, I don't want the State of Israel sending me texts to try to convince me that the Iran war is good, and Israel needs more money. We are already plastered with pro-State-of-Israel propaganda across news agencies, and several of our politicians have already admitted they are in the pocket of the State of Israel. I don't need AI texts trying to tell me the U.S. needs to support a regime that even Israeli nations know is corrupt. 

I reported this to the FBI, but with our current leadership that wants to do whatever Israel says, we'll see where that goes.