US taxpayer dollars absolutely go to Israel. Israel is by far the largest beneficiary of foreign aid - more so than any other country.
Here's a source I found interesting that explains US aid to Israel:
https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts
As the article explains, "Israel has long been the leading recipient of US foreign aid, including military assistance"
Over $17 billion in aid has been given to Israel by the US since Oct. 7, and this is in addition to the $5 billion or so provided annually.
I don't think the US has given $17 billion in direct military aid to Hamas so I'm sorry, but I'm just not as concerned about that.
The US has given around $600 million to various Palestinian support projects, including $2.1 billion in humanitarian assistance since Oct. 7
Recap:
Israel: Around $21 billion in direct military aid since Oct. 7
Palestinians: $600 million in 3 years, plus $2.1 billion in humanitarian aid since Oct. 7
One of these budget line items is exceptionally more expensive to the US taxpayer than the other, so that's why it is under scrutiny.
Do I take issues with corruption and US aid being squandered and misused by both the Palestinian authority and Israel? Absolutely, which is why I advocate drastically cutting it - especially the direct military aid.
Yes, Israel does purchase weapons from the US, with the money given to it by the US taxpayer. But that doesn't mean it's a great deal for the US taxpayer. In fact, it's a rather rotten one, because due to the intense lobbying efforts of groups like AIPAC, Americans don't really get to vote or have a say on this. Plus, this money hardly goes to benefit the Average American in any way, and instead ends up in the coffers of the wealthy defense companies as private profit.
It's kind of like this: Imagine if a store was handing out credit to be used at the store. It was giving poor people $5 vouchers to buy apples at the store.
Except, instead of $5, it's $25 billion dollars, and instead of apples, it's 2000lb bombs that are dropped on other poor people in a foreign land. And it's not the store giving out the money, it's the US taxpayer that has little say in the matter. Either pay the tax or go to jail.
So the taxpayer is on the hook for that $25 billion, that yes, Israel then uses to order from the US catalog of weaponry. But the profit the private for-profit arms industry companies make from this stays with them, not the American people.
So, the American taxpayer might as well be pissing $25 billion directly into the pockets of arm industry executives. Instead, we get something even worse: a humanitarian nightmare playing out on the other side of the world that we have no choice but to continue funding - which is enriching the private arms industry, all while homeless people continue to be bombed.
We have our own homeless crisis in the US. Imagine how much housing could be built to benefit US citizens (including Jews) with that $25 billion, rather than it going to make other people homeless via war in the Middle East.
It's an appalling 'deal' for US taxpayer. If the private companies were extending the credit, then that would be one thing. But that's not the case. The average American taxpayer is on the hook for all of this - and the burden falls disproportionately on the poor and middle class since the wealthy (who often encourage and lobby for these wars and profit off them) pay little tax anyways.
So, please explain to me how taxing the taxpayer collectively of $25 billion serves the US economically, when that could have instead gone to schools, housing, infrastructure, etc. rather than directly into the pockets of the executives at Elbit, Lockeed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon not to mention all the kickbacks and corruption inherent in this whole process.
And sure, those wealthy enough (and amoral enough) to own stock in these war profiteering companies might benefit, along with some employees. But most Americans do not work for an arms company, or own vast stock in these enterprises. The people profiting immensely from all this are a very thin sliver of the US population.
It's a raw deal for the US taxpayer.
