Marjorie Taylor Greene, the outspoken far-right Republican from Georgia, has ignited a heated debate over the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. In one of her most recent social media posts, she urged Americans to show more sympathy for the Palestinian citizens. This recent message is at odds with her past disruptive statements and actions. Greene repeated her call for the United States to reconsider its financial and military support for Israel as the conflict intensifies.
In her post, Greene described the situation in Gaza as akin to genocide, stating that “the innocent people in Gaza did not kill and kidnap the innocent people in Israel on Oct 7th.” Her most recent outrage was for the victims of the attacks in Israel on October 7th. Our testimony, which you can read below, builds on the spirit of her comments. Greene’s call for compassion on both sides reflects her frustration with U.S. support for the war. She is most focused on what this means for everyday American taxpayers.
As usual, Greene’s controversial statements have received both acclaim and condemnation, especially from her right-wing comrades. She linked U.S. financial aid to Israel’s military actions, arguing that it implicates every American taxpayer in what she described as a foreign war. “I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to pay for genocide in a foreign country against a foreign people for a foreign war that I had nothing to do with,” she stated, emphasizing her opposition to American funding for Israeli military operations.
As Greene lamented in an early post, how could Americans continue to eat, sleep, and go about their lives while others were in pain? She asked rhetorically, “Just as we spoke out and had compassion for the victims and families of Oct 7, how can Americans not speak out and have compassion for the masses of innocent people and children in Gaza?” Her comments represent a major turn away from her past rhetoric on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Greene’s comments have prompted an ugly feud with fellow antisemite lightning rod Laura Loomer. Loomer was vehemently opposed to Greene’s position. She dared Greene to question her commitment to Israel, then called for a harder line on immigration and foreign policy vis-a-vis Gaza. Their very public spat illustrates the deep fault lines within conservative circles over the appropriate level of U.S. engagement in foreign wars.
Greene has argued that President Trump should be able to stop Palestinians from suffering. “Let’s be clear: President Trump has the power to end the starvation of the Palestinian people,” she asserted, framing her appeal as a call to action for Trump supporters.
The horrific situation in Gaza has received great media attention, with many commentators adding their two cents to thoughts on the humanitarian crisis. According to a UN-backed Integrated Food Security Phase Classification report, the famine in Gaza is “completely the result of human actions.” It makes clear that this crisis is reversible if we take the right actions. This report highlights that complexity, where humanitarian relief is frequently blocked by warring factions and shifting borders still brought about by the Syrian civil war.
Greene’s hawkish stance has not escaped the attention of other political figures. Bernie Sanders found her tone, stressing the importance of “non-violent humanitarian aid” to Palestinians while condemning violent attacks. Nonetheless, opposing perspectives keep surfacing, and some of the critics still insist that a subtle view of the complex conflict is needed.