it's about humanities, it doesn't matter what you believe and it doesn't matter what you look like. it doesn't matter where you're from. and let's get more of this story from the the fault of william joe crow. we didn't just based on what they saw in is report there, talk to us a bit about what the relations between jewish and ballasting and communities have traditionally been like in the united states. and if the most that attacks have changed in any significant way. and i think what we heard from you is report, there is a very good understanding that these groups, like all groups are not model. that's right. and you have a variety of political opinions. you have a variety of demographics that are in forming those opinions. and we hear that, you know, you have in all groups you have, you know, nationalists who are happy to lean into these kinds of fears and, and hatred and anger towards other groups. and then you also have seen, especially in last reason we groups calling for peace groups calling for co

existence groups calling for the end the war groups looking to sit, you know, to sympathize with the other. i think if there are 2 broad things that, that jews and palestinians in the united states specifically do have in common is one, they're both. they ask for rich groups, right. they're both groups that are largely in the diaspora. the palestinians, of course, standing from the 1948 founding of israel and the displacement that happened as a result and use going back, you know, basically the entire history of the jewish people. you can look at the inquisition, you can look at, of course, in more modern times, the holocaust pushing and spreading and forcing people all around the world. and that means that in addition to the geo political and geostrategic importance of the region, when things like this in israel and with the policy ends happen, you also have very personal connection to this region due to that, i asked for a situation and that causes, as we've seen this report, you know, anger, fear, worries to be to run very, very hot. nonetheless,

what we saw on october 7 isn't anything particularly new in terms of relations. but when these things happen, when these awful incidents of violence of terrorism of war happens, what we see is, of course, these sorts of issues coming more to the 4, they're always there. but in these moments of crisis, they're just that much more present. and you also have president biden, having said that the us stands with is rarely, in addition to sending ministry support to is around how, by listing here. and then the wider out of the communities in the us. interpreting that support as the us is always in a tricky situation when it comes to israel. in particular, right, i want to have the us as iron clad commitments to israel to defend the state of visual, to defend the existence of israel and to its defense. right. against the many threats that israel se system has spaced over the years, but at the same time, of course, the error world cannot be ignored. the other side of things cannot be ignored. the

united states has security interest as economic interest in parts of the world. but see things very differently. and so you do have this very difficult balancing act that the united states over successive governments, regardless of who's president, regardless of what party is in power, to show its commitment to israel while the same time, at least trying to appear what they liked to call themselves as a neutral broker, of course, that's question both the united states really can be a neutral broker when you're such a large and influential superpower in the world. and you have your own interest that you are trying to protect. but nonetheless, we've seen this since the attacks with the us, while giving israel quite a bit of latitude to defend itself in the way it sees fit at the same time raining it in, by reminding it of its commitments to international law. and it actually is, as we've been hearing from reports, you know, a lot of collaboration and quote, communication between israeli and united states military establishment to sort of shape and guide exactly how israel's military response and gaza is going to go out

. so we see the united states trying to walk that fine line. and also in, for example, the hostage is working with come power, for example, to try to get some of at least the american hostage. so this is, this is that the delicate political balance at the us always spaces and these kinds of moments. and it's particularly that a military role that i'd like to discuss with you further. bring them here just like to stay on the line because we just need to 1st look at what the us has recently said on this particular aspect. because speaking to the program, 60 minutes on us, new outlet, cbs vice president come to hardy said, and i quote, we have absolutely no intention, nor do we have any plans to send the combat troops into is around, oh, gods, a period. so we have, we also looked at security issues for data and we just talked about, but the united states sees as it's really pre roll in the cut into conflict. right. and that quote, from pamela harris. combat troops is the important term here. the us, of course,

has a presence in many parts of the world. uh, it just depends how you define presence, right? maybe not in a combat role, but certainly in training, in support for as many weapon systems itself. and you see that it is where it was. well, there is some american presence in israel, just given the sheer amount of american weaponry and equipment in israel tickets sold and given to israel every year. you do have american supports for that, and we have seen it, especially since how mazda is attacks. we see increased coordination and collaboration, at least from the reporting. we're hearing what the defense department, united states of saying between israel and the united states. but campbell harris does make the point. there will be no boots on the ground as they say, just like we've heard a new crane rights full support for ukraine, just like full support for israel, but no direct intervention. nonetheless, the us of course, maintains a massive military presence all around the world, especially in the middle east to defend what it sees as its interest, especially visa b. a b, ron, right. we saw those strikes in syria against targets from the running and back

groups. this was, as they said, in response to a tax against us personnel in rock. so it's a very delicate balance to, as the, as, as the white house is said, deterrence without exacerbating or widening the conflict between them. don't music instances also show that the us is itself a target for monitoring and proxies. and if so, is there a danger? for instance, of the us enters into a direct conflict with it on right. that danger is always there. and of course the united states as a long history of some very bloody attack. so you have to think about 11 on, for example, in the 1980s the, the us personnel that, that came under attack there. so the us is certainly not, no stranger to a being directly attacked by iran proxies and by other uh, you know, opponents in the regents of the united states. right now what we're seeing is,

as i said, united states wants to defend its interest, wants to set a send a message to a, to the ron and to it's affiliated groups around the region. not to get involved, not to escalate. but at the same time, the us doesn't want to escalate itself. i think the us, the last thing wants to do, especially, was trying to re negotiate a nuclear deal with iran is to have yet another major war in the middle east forever. jo biding by getting out of afghanistan. i want to get away from this whole region. he wants to focus on china and russia and not get bogged down. and then the lease as the united states did for the 20 years after 911, with very little positive effect and just devastating consequences for the region and real, no real security games for the united states. and i think that's what the, by the investigation is looking at, trying to look at that recent history and not go down that road again. well, the same time b as the united states needs to decide it's interest. still showing that it is, it has the assets to do so without further attacking ation,

antagonist ation. but the person is also how far will the us actually go when it comes to supporting ease of alameda telling me, i mean, what does that consist of that support? right. and is the us already since the most amount of for an aide, and most of it is military age to his role than any other country in the world. it has now since the existence that israel has said do billions and billions and billions of dollars worth of mostly military israel. so that's that partnership that support for israel, especially as defense, is already there. we've already seen um you know, promises and actually deliveries of new munitions, especially when it comes to the iron. don't the iron down which is where it was famous for this missile defense isn't this highly effective against homos rocket attacks is actually a us weapon system, right. this was developed by racism by lockheed martin major american military contractors. and so there's been promises to send more to israel, but we have to remember the us is also trying to supply ukraine's trying to supply taiwan. and we are officially, anyways, any piece time production situation, right?

we are, we're not like a world war 2 situation where the entire economy has been turned over to producing to fight a war. so there are supply chain issues, right? just the ukraine alone, the united states and its european allies have had trouble getting the weapons and the ammunition that ukraine is asked for and has been promised to actually get into the field. so whether they can be better or faster, they're just certain, some just certain physical constraints that the united states spaces in now keeping of its renewed commitments to israel, whether it's a missiles, missile defense and other kinds of major weapon systems that israel has asked for, or may ask for especially ammunition for its airplanes, because this has primarily been an air war less thus far. when we've also heard in the past few weeks talk of a mazda the front was that each man could be facing. and depending on whom you speak to the front or the expand or frame, but in any case,

the remain locked in front. some people talk about has been in addition to the west bank and then he's been facing internal security threats. i mean, the question that i was basically sort of arriving at is, depending on how is it around the phase in their families, in a potential multi front pool. is that a possibility that the us has to actually put boots on the ground that actually fight for israel? so this is a big question of ice the or radical question. for now at least of course, israel's existence is not in question hum. austin has bull out while they can strike very, very, what very heinous means is relative. they of course, do not threaten the very existence of israel. nonetheless, that question is a valid one because it's something that a country like united states space is what does it really mean when we say we, we stand up for israel's defense? we stand up for its existence. we will make sure that it continues to exist. what does that really mean we, we see that not only in the case of israel see the case of us commitments to taiwan

us, commitments, ukraine, how far will the united states really go to make, to, you know, to, to, to, to back it's words with deeds that is something we're very far from israel does have experience with fighting multi front doors. we saw that in 1967 we saw the 1973 in 1973, which was the greatest threats to is rarely to israel's continued existence. as a state of the united states did get very close to actually not maybe 20 boots on the ground, but, but very, very intense military support for israel in those 1st days of the surprise attack against israel on multiple friends when he's real, really was facing quite an x, a central crisis, that is not what we're facing right now, but the point remains what if the northern front from left but not from his blood becomes active. what if the rod does want to escalate at visa versus that israel faces? and i think a major headache for the united states, which as i said earlier, has many competing interests in the region. and well, these role might be

a 1st among equals, it is not the only interest by far, not the only interest in the region. we're living there for the timing, but thanks very much with him for bringing all that context to us. we didn't blue cross. thank you. and that's it. so now there's continuing updates on these, but i'm also on our website. i'm going to a strategy in relating to, thanks so much for watching the cheeriest view of outer space. huge students go in the today and as you come a day and they'll stick to talk you the images of volume. and soon, the greatest lucy, even the extremely zones telescope, e l t begins a new check in this tournament. actually

we don't have a choice thing. so we have little time list to save the planet. so we have to do what we can as fast as possible. we only have one generation left just 25 years to increment the greatest resolution. since the, during the fee and through a replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy around the world without exception is a global energy transformation really possible or is it or any these researches are working on amazing documentary, the renewables resolution jobs november 25th. i'm dw,

the, [000:00:00;00]

the, this is the, the news line from bell in israel steps up. it's ground operation and gaza. time pushed into the outskirts of gauze and cities, as the military says, it has killed thousands more. i'm off by. i'm of says more than 8000 palestinians have no been killed. also coming off as pressure grows on the israeli government to secure the release of hostages, helped by how boss