AIPAC and Israel-First politicians know that with support for Israel at an all-time low, renegotiating the 3.8 billion they get annually from the American taxpayers might not go well. Their solution? Merge the two militaries’ R&D, give Israel equal ownership and access to emerging tech, and place Israeli War Industries in every congressional district in America to force our representatives to answer to Tel Aviv. In the future, defunding the IDF will require defunding the U.S. Armed Services. This “gift” to Israel is worth more than every fighter jet, warship, and aircraft carrier in the American fleet, combined. And worse yet, it will make pleasing Israel a priority for every member of Congress.
On January 17, 1961, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned Americans that the conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry was new in American experience, and that its total influence - economic, political, and even spiritual - was felt in every city, every statehouse, and every office of the federal government. He warned that Americans must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex, and that the potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. He also warned that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. and worried about both the weapons manufacturers owning the politicians and the technocrats owning the policy.
This was not a pacifist academic or an antiwar protester. This was the Supreme Allied Commander of World War II, the man who planned the Normandy invasion, a five-star general who had spent his entire adult life inside the military establishment he was warning the country about. He knew exactly what he was describing because he had watched it being built from the inside, and he waited until he had nothing left to lose politically before he said it out loud.
Fast-forward roughly one thousand days, and the CIA assassinated his successor for a combination of offenses. These include Kennedy’s intentions to pull the U.S. out of Vietnam, his desire to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds” for lying to him about the Bay of Pigs, his desire to investigate the intel agencies for their roles in foreign assassinations, his pressing of Israeli PM David Ben Gurion to come clean about Israel’s nuclear program, and his Executive Order 11110, effectively bypassing the Federal Reserve, which is the single greatest component of the Industrial War Complex, providing the financial architecture needed for endless war: a government that must tax its citizens directly and visibly for every dollar it spends on weapons and soldiers faces an immediate and politically lethal constraint, but the Federal Reserve gives the U.S. government the ability to finance war through debt monetization (borrowing money that the Federal Reserve creates, spending it on the military-industrial complex, and distributing the cost invisibly across the entire economy through inflation rather than visibly through direct taxation). As you can see, each of Kennedy’s actions was an attempt to make the Industrial War Complex heel to the elected government. Each of those actions was stopped the moment the CIA killed him, never to be revived.
From Kennedy onward, the State of Israel has been the hub of the global war economy. Israel’s religious commitment to warfare provides an endless supply of new conflict. Founded primarily by Jewish secularists and atheists, Israel’s religious radicals have wrestled for control in the Knesset and national governance as the years go by, with war escalating every year that religious Jews gain more power. Combined with their cheerleaders in the United States among the politically powerful evangelical voters who let Israel get by with almost anything under a flawed, anti-Christian interpretation of Genesis 12, Israel provides the conflict, the U.S. subsidizes it, and underwrites their wars.
But that gravy train was about to be over, and that gold egg-laying goose was about to be cooked, because the $3.8 billion annual military assistance package to Israel was established under the 2016 Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Obama administration, and is set to expire in 2028. This is happening at precisely the moment when public opinion has shifted most dramatically against unconditional support for Israel, thanks to the Internet making it increasingly difficult to keep up the charade that Americans and Israel share the same values. Evangelical Christian Zionism, the single most important domestic religious constituency for unconditional Israeli support, is a boomer and silent generation phenomenon, and they’re dying off. The war in Iran has made it clear to millions exactly how much power Israel has in Washington, as we’ve watched the most Alpha-dog president in memory kowtow to Israel like their pet. And video imagery available 24/7 has revealed war crimes and genocide in Gaza and Lebanon that Americans and authetic Chrsitians want nothing to do with.
Even the demise of Rep. Thomas Massie, in which Americans watched three Jewish billionaires with Israeli citizenships scuttle the career of who - only a year ago - was considered one of the most stalwart conservative congressmen in our lifetimes, watching him be primaried out of office by a foreign nation in partnership with the omnipotent war lobby, makes justifying continued aid to Israel nearly impossible to justify for a growing number of Americans. In fact, not supporting Israel is about the only thing far-left non-Jewish Democrats, Libertarians, and far-right conservatives who hold to historic (non-Dispensational) Christianity - and everyone in between - have in common.
The only Americans left who support Israel are Jews, evangelicals who interpret the Bible like Jews, war lobbyists, and Boomers who consume copious amounts of Fox News. And the last group is dying.
They’ve got a plan for that. And it’s called Section 224.
SECTION 224
The United States Congress, the most expensive legislative body that foreign money can buy, has decided that the American people’s opinion on Israel is no longer a variable worth calculating. You wanted Israel’s gravy train to end, or at least, be slowed down. As American voters, you said so out loud, in polls, in town halls, in the primaries, where the few brave souls willing to ask basic questions about American sovereignty got the political equivalent of a wood chipper applied to their careers. But you let yourself be known.
A whopping 62% of this country - a higher majority than we have about anything, except maybe approval of the Costco hotdog price - wants military assistance to Israel cut or conditioned. That figure, 62%, is a mandate in any democratic system, and especially in ours. Congress looked at that number, nodded thoughtfully, and then AIPAC came up with a plan to work around it, and buried Section 224 in a $1.15 trillion defense bill that nobody outside of a think tank and a handful of congressional staffers will ever read, let alone understand.
They did not slow down the gravy train. They ripped out the tracks so nobody could find the station. It’s not only not ending Israel’s war welfare at U.S. taxpayer expense, it’s merging the U.S. and Israeli mililtary into one. Or, in another way of looking at it, it’s actually giving our military - our greatest national, non-natural resources - to Israel.
Section 224 of the FY2027 National Defense Authorization Act is titled, with the bureaucratic blandness that Washington deploys whenever it is doing something it cannot defend in plain English, the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative.” What it does is conjoin the U.S. military and the Israeli military at the institutional, technological, and industrial level across the very weapons domains that every defense analyst alive agrees will determine who wins the next major war.
It does not give Israel money. It does not give Israel weapons. It gives Israel the American military. And once the bill passes, the mechanism for reversing it will be the same as the mechanism for un-baking a cake; it can’t be done. Our entire military, or at least, its most important parts moving forward into the future, will be the property of the Nation of Israel.
THE ANNUAL VOTE WAS BECOMING A PROBLEM
Washington has a reliable method for handling democratic pressure on policies it has no intention of changing. It does not argue with the public. Argument creates attention, and attention is the enemy. What Washington does instead, with the practiced efficiency of an institution that has been managing inconvenient public opinion for two centuries, is to restructure the policy so that the public no longer has a mechanism to express its opinion: take public sentiment completely off the table. Section 224 is that restructuring, applied to the most politically radioactive relationship in American foreign policy.
PREMIUM SUBSCRIBERS, GET YOUR ZOOM LINK FOR LIVE Q&A WITH JD AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ARTICLE, PAST THE PAYWALL
For decades, military assistance to Israel moved through the annual Congressional appropriations process. This meant, in theory, that it was subject to public accountability. Members had to vote on it. Constituents could see the vote. The relationship between American tax dollars and Israeli military operations was, at a minimum, technically visible to the electorate that was paying for it. The 2016 Memorandum of Understanding locked in $3.8 billion annually for 10 years, a guaranteed figure that expires in 2028. That expiration date is the deadline that our politicians in Washington know can’t be renewed without incredible political consequences by voters back home.
A renegotiation of Israel’s annual war welfare check conducted in the current political environment, subject to public debate and floor votes, and the kind of constituent pressure that has been building since the genocide stats have started trickling out of Gaza, might not produce $3.8 billion. It might produce considerably less by politicians afraid to vote yes because their constituents back home don’t approve of Israel’s bottomless war crimes and their Greater Israel ambitions that promise war until kingdom come. Less money from the American taxpayer for Israel is unacceptable, as the AIPAC lobbyists have made clear by dropping 32 million to oust Thomas Massie. The welfare check renegotiation process might produce the kind of open congressional debate about why we are underwriting Israel’s war ambitions that the Israel Lobby has spent fifty years preventing.
The public is now paying attention in ways it has not before. The polling is not in their favor. Members were being asked to justify themselves. Thomas Massie stood on the floor of the House and said things that needed to be said. Marjorie Taylor Greene said things that needed to be said. President Trump, who became captive to the Israel Lobby sometime around the spring of 2025, went to war on MAGA conservatives on their behalf, the same way he reluctantly went to war with Iran, when Israel gave him no choice.
The Israel Lobby’s answer to an inconvenient member of Congress is to remove the member by dumping millions against their congressional campaigns. They’ve been doing that since J. William Fulbright in 1974, Paul Findlay and Pete McCloskey in 1982, and Charles Percy in 1984, etc. AIPAC has a long list of candidates it scuttled - many of them, incredibly popular in their districts, but who just couldn’t compete with the bottomless campaign funds of a foreign nation injected into the American political system to defeat them.
That works, as far as it goes. But public opinion keeps getting worse for Israel as more and more people are awakened to both their control over the American government and their penchant for ethnic cleansing, and not even Israel and its vast bench of Jewish billionaires can keep up the type of money-dumping that defeating Thomas Massie required. The solution is to take the vote on how much money Americans give Israel off the table permanently. Section 224 does exactly that.
Once the U.S.-Israel relationship migrates from the annual appropriations process into the permanent machinery of defense procurement and acquisition, it becomes administratively invisible. No floor vote. No line item. No constituent calls. The relationship will stay inside the Pentagon budget, administered by a bureaucrat whose briefings go to defense committee members in classified settings, hermetically sealed from the public that is theoretically sovereign over it. The $3.8 billion renegotiation becomes a moot question when the two militaries are structurally inseparable. You do not renegotiate a relationship that is tied to your own weapons systems.
The provision’s origins confirm exactly how this works. Section 224 did not arise organically from the House Armed Services Committee’s independent assessment of American strategic needs. It is the reanimated corpse of two bills (H.R. 7540 and S. 3855) constituting the U.S.-Israel FUTURES Act, introduced by Rep. Ronny Jackson of Texas and Sen. Ted Budd of North Carolina. That bill couldn’t pass because it literally gave the future of the U.S. military to a foreign nation that the majority of Americans don’t support. So its architects found a bill too large and too essential to stop, and they dropped it inside. That bill authorizes the entire U.S. military. Any congressman voting against it would be accused of defunding the armed forces. Section 224 was smuggled inside it.
GIVING ISRAEL THE U.S. MILITARY
Every previous act of American generosity toward Israel, however staggering in dollar terms, retained one attribute that kept it from being something worse. The U.S. and Israel remained separate militaries, with separate command structures, separate technology pipelines, and separate strategic priorities that occasionally aligned and occasionally did not. American taxpayers gave money and weapons, collaborated on specific weapons systems, shared intelligence (in ways that frequently served Israeli interests more than American ones), and generally behaved like a country that had been successfully convinced its national interest was identical to another country’s national interest. That is a problem, for sure. But Section 224 is a different category of problem altogether.
The provision mandates that the Secretary of Defense designate a dedicated bureaucrat whose statutory function is to synchronize the two countries’ defense establishments across six technology domains.
Artificial intelligence and autonomous systems.
Quantum computing. Cybersecurity and full data network integration.
Directed energy weapons.
Counter-unmanned systems.
Biotechnology.
Read that list again and understand what it represents. Those six domains are the consensus of every serious defense analyst working today as the primary theaters of warfare over the next fifty years.
The wars coming will be won or lost in AI targeting systems. They will be won or lost in autonomous drone swarms operating faster than human decision-making. They will be won or lost in quantum-encrypted communications and the ability to break everyone else’s. They will be won or lost in cyber operations, directed energy platforms, and the biological and technological domains that military planners are currently treating as the absolute frontier of human conflict.
Congress is proposing to co-develop all of it with Israel, to fuse the development pipelines themselves, from the research stage forward, with a foreign government’s military establishment.
When your AI targeting architecture is jointly developed with Israel, Israel is inside your AI targeting architecture before a single weapon is ever deployed. When your autonomous drone swarms are built on a jointly developed platform, Israeli engineers have visibility into the operational logic of American weapons systems in active combat. When your cyber defense networks are fused with Israeli intelligence infrastructure through statutory data fusion requirements, Israeli intelligence has access to American military data at a level that no adversary and no ally has ever possessed. The bill calls for network integration and data fusion in plain statutory text. Analysts reviewing the provision have been clear: American military data becomes Israeli military data. American research and development becomes Israeli research and development. American weapons systems become Israel’s weapons systems.
In no uncertain terms, the military of the future United States, the weapons of the future United States, and the war of the future of the United States will belong in equal share to Israel. The inverse is also true. The military of the future Israel, along with its weapons and wars, will belong to the United States.
THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PLAY
The military-industrial complex’s grip on American foreign policy has never operated primarily through bribery, though bribery is available and frequently used. It operates through economic geography. The Industrial War Complex was smart enough to place its industries and factories in every single congressional district in the United States. Because industry means jobs, the Industrial War Complex makes politicians in Washington beholden to it. This was one of the absolute smartest power plays by the complex against the American people, ensuring that if a congressman ever votes against Pentagon funding, the factory or industry in that district will start laying off workers, with the blame laid at the feet of the congressman who voted against it. It was by design, and it’s been a very successful mode of control over the last 60 years.
For example, Lockheed Martin builds the F-35 across hundreds of congressional districts, which makes no sense for our national security because a supply-line issue in any district shuts down production. But it makes perfect sense for congressional funding, because a vote against the F-35 is a vote against the aerospace jobs in a member’s own backyard. The congressman votes for the funding because his constituents work there, and his constituents will vote against him if he does not. This is not corruption in the legal sense. It is a structural dependency, engineered into the physical landscape of American employment. This is what Eisenhower meant when he warned that the military-industrial complex’s influence was felt “in every city, every statehouse, and every office of the federal government.”
Section 224 creates the statutory and institutional framework to multiply that model across the country at a scale never attempted by any foreign government in American history. The Quincy Institute explains that by expanding or starting new co-production facilities, the Israeli government can boast of providing jobs on American soil, securing allies among members of Congress who represent the districts where those jobs are. The result is a political system even more susceptible to Israeli government priorities, because the leverage is no longer just lobbying dollars and primary threats. It is paychecks. It is the factory down the road. It is the defense contract that keeps the lights on in a district that has no other major employer. That congressman is not going to vote against Israeli foreign policy preferences. He cannot afford to.
Lockheed Martin is an American company. Raytheon is an American company. Their influence over American foreign policy is corrupting and frequently catastrophic, but the profits stay inside the American economy, and the political leverage, however distorted, is at least domestically generated. What Section 224 constructs is a mechanism for a foreign government to acquire and exercise the same kind of embedded economic leverage that domestic defense contractors have spent seventy years building. The crucial difference is that now, the entity wielding that leverage answers to Tel Aviv, not Washington. This is foreign industrial capture of the congressional vote, using American workers as the instrument, authorized by statute, and wrapped in the flag of alliance and mutual defense.
THEY REMOVED MASSIE BEFORE THE VOTE
Thomas Massie posted on social media that if Section 224 makes it out of committee, he would offer an amendment to strip it from the bill on the floor. He wrote three words that should not be controversial in a constitutional republic: “We are a sovereign country.” Rep. Derrick Van Orden responded by accusing Massie of antisemitism. Of course, he did.
This is the full intellectual content of the pro-Section 224 position - that asking whether the United States should fuse its military technology pipeline with a foreign government constitutes hatred of Jewish people. Massie responded by asking whether the new integration arrangement qualifies America for those advanced Israeli pagers, a reference to Israel’s 2024 operation in which it rigged communication devices carried by Hezbollah members to detonate, killing and injuring hundreds of people, including children.
Massie lost his seat before he could cast the vote he had promised. Ro Khanna, a progressive Democrat from California, has announced he will introduce an amendment in the House Armed Services Committee markup session scheduled for June 4 to strip Section 224 entirely, tagging Massie in the post and writing that Trump cannot kill the Massie-Khanna partnership no matter how much he posts on Truth Social. A libertarian Republican and a progressive Democrat are the last two visible opponents of a provision in a $1.15 trillion defense bill. One of them no longer has a seat. The other is in the minority party. The Republican mainstream, the party that spent decades warning about foreign influence in American institutions, is carrying water for the most ambitious foreign influence operation in American legislative history and calling its critics antisemites.
If you appreciate my work, please grab a premium subscription to access exclusive content (like the rest of this article). This is how I provide for my family, so I sure appreciate it. Act now and get aa HUGE 30% discount.
If you don’t do subscriptions, please consider a one-time gift of your choosing by clicking here.
