it's like, it doesn't matter where you're from, the and let's get more of this story from the, the fault of william hill cross we just based on what they saw in n. s as report their talk to us a bit about what the relations between jewish and busting and communities have traditionally been like in the united states. and if the most data tags have changed in any significant way. i think what we've heard from you is report, there is a very good understanding that these groups, like all groups are not model. that's right. you have a variety of political opinions. you have a variety of demographics that are in swimming, those opinions, and we hear that you know, you have in all groups you have, you don't 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 how to comment is one, they're both. they ask for rich groups, right? they're both groups that are largely, you know, a diaspora. the palestinians, of course, standing from the next and $48.00 founding of israel and the displacement that happened as a result. and you is 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 has happened, you also have very personal connection to this region. due to that, i asked for a situation in that causes, as we've seen in this report, you know, anger seer, 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 isabel, in addition to sending ministry support to is around how by listing in the wider out of communities in the us. interpreting that support in 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 defence right. against the many threats that israel faces and has faced over the years. but at the same time, of course, the arrow boiled, 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, a balancing act of the united states over successive governments. but 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 questionable if united states really can be a neutral broker when you're such a large and influential super power 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 is rarely and united states military establishment to sort of shape and guide exactly how israel's military response and gaza is going to go. so

we see the united states trying to walk that fine line. and also in, for example, the hostage is working with comp are for example, to try to get some of the, of at least the american hostage. so this is, this is that the, the delicate political balance at the us always spaces in these kinds of moments. and it's particularly, but a military role that i'd like to discuss with you further bring them. you're 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 loveland. cbs vice president cumberland hardy said, and i quote, we have absolutely no intention nor do we have any plans to send to come back to troops into is around, oh, gods, a period to we have. we also look at security issues for the w. just talk to separate above the united states sees as it's really pre roll in the cut into conflict pricing 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 it's many weapon systems itself and you see that it is or it was, well, there is some american presence in israel, just given the sheer amount of, 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 are 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 is it's interest, especially these a v, a b ron, right. we saw those strikes in syria against targets from the ronnie and backed

groups. this was, as they said, in response to attacks 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 to be as an instance, as also show that the us is itself a target for meeting and proxies. and if so, is that a danger, for instance, that the us enters into a direct conflict with get 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 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, of 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 at the last thing wants to do, especially, was trying to re negotiate a nuclear deal with the wrong is to have yet another major war in the middle east forever. jo biding by getting out of afghanistan wants 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 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 administration 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 are right. and is the us already since the most amount of for an aide, and most of it is military age to israel than any other country in the world. it has now since the existence of israel has said to billions and billions and billions of dollars worth of mostly military israel. so that, 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 relas payments for this missile defense system is highly effective against homos rocket attacks is actually a us weapon system, right. this was developed by raytheon by lockheed martin major american military contractors. and so there's been promises to send more to ease of what we have to remember. the us is also trying to supply ukraine's try to supply taiwan. and we are officially any weights in a piece time production situation, right?

we are, we're not like in a world where to 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 added to europe, allies that had trouble getting the weapons and the ammunition that ukraine has 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 faces 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 airplanes, because this has primarily been an air war less thus far. we've also heard in the past few weeks talk of a multi front wall that is read could be facing. and depending on whom you speak to the front or the expand or frame, but in any case, the remain mode in front. some people talk about has been in addition to the west

bank and then he's been phasing 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 fair i was 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. diversity or radical question. for now at least of course, israel's existence is not in question hum. austin has beloved 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, so in 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 that 1973 in 1973, which was the greatest threats to is really to israel's continued existence as a state of the united states did get very close to actually not maybe pretty 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 israel really was facing quite an extra central crisis. that is not what we're facing right now, but the point remains. what if the northern front from lab or not from his blood becomes active? what if the rod does want to escalate these options that israel faces? and i think a major headache for the united states, which as i said earlier, has many competing interest 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 live with the for the timing, but thanks very much with him for bringing all that context to us. we didn't blue cross. thank you to and that's it. so now there's continuing updates on these, but i'm also on our website. i'm getting strategy in relating to thanks so much for watching the

superstition reality. they are assigned to this day. the dw reporter cutting him still follows in the footsteps offer and sister who is at the state college. he is, which is really a thing in 30 minutes, d, w here, rocks forgotten, children press on their father's members of isis or 10 or in prison. and so they are forced to work together. they search for usable things. they are societies outcasts, the scraps collectors, most of those up in 75 minutes on d, w. not just another day. so much is happening all

at once. we take time to understand this is the day i the i'm in the look at the current and use events analyzed by experts and critical thing here is not just another new. so weekdays on d, w, dw, so on fix all we, in fact, every day, the world cash. i used to work for free because we can make the different w call, the world unpack, pulse out your info is and all the inputs w story. now on to the

business, dw, news live from valid israel is on the growing pressure to secure the release of the hostages, held by a monster. prime minister benjamin it's now says he's doing everything possible to bring them home. but the german is riley bowman. kids not doing the october 7th, the tax is now confirmed to be along with that also coming off as well. so that's up, it's ground operation times pushed into the outskirts of kansas city as the minutes or it says it has killed dawson moore.