They sure could and would. They make most of their own arms. The biggest thing the US is doing is holding off a larger war. They do not need the ammo we supply, it just makes it less challenging for them.
Now we are getting off topic, but no I don’t. You can run through the Muslim countries and they either are too small to supply troops or are large enough, but want nothing to do with Palestinians. It’s an important question in that peacekeepers will surely be needed in the future. It’s should be part of aa plan Bibi doesn’t have.
They sure could and would. They make most of their own arms. The biggest thing the US is doing is holding off a larger war. They do not need the ammo we supply, it just makes it less challenging for them.
No the US is helping hold off the rest of the world from doing a peace keeping mission to stop Israel from the genocide it’s doing.
It doesn’t matter if we stop weapons if we don’t also use soft power to stop the killings.
Who in the world are you imagining? I’ve seen no one step to the plate.
Starting to see why this keeps happening to you if that’s your logic
Why? Because I ask a reasonable question? In order to have peacekeepers you need countries to supply them.
Because the UN has been trying to do peacekeeping only to be vetoed by USA
https://www.npr.org/2024/02/20/1232636543/un-security-council-gaza-cease-fire-vote
https://www.npr.org/2023/12/08/1218332312/israel-hamas-war-us-ceasefire-veto-un
The UN does not have its own forces, it must aquire the blue hats from member countries. So, the question remains.
You don’t think any of the countries voting in favor of the ceasefire would add troops?
Now we are getting off topic, but no I don’t. You can run through the Muslim countries and they either are too small to supply troops or are large enough, but want nothing to do with Palestinians. It’s an important question in that peacekeepers will surely be needed in the future. It’s should be part of aa plan Bibi doesn’t have.