There are various points of view on a controversial section 219 within the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) bill that passed the House of Representatives last night and is heading to the Senate.
Section 219 (formerly Section 224) is part of the Fiscal Year 2027 NDAA. It directs the Secretary of Defense to designate a Pentagon executive agent responsible for overseeing the United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative, which aims to accelerate joint research, development, testing, evaluation, and industrial cooperation between the U.S. and Israel in defense technologies; specifically: missile defense, counter-drone systems, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, quantum computing, directed energy, biotechnology, and autonomous systems.
Many people are mistakenly viewing this section as a merge of the military; that’s not the case. The issue is specifically about joint collaboration on missile defense systems and drone technology. Secretary Marco Rubio was asked about it today. Rubio’s response is outlined below:
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you know the Senate better than most anybody. They’re debating the new military policy bill right now after the House passed it. One of the more controversial topics is about fusing the U.S. and Israeli military when it comes to co-production on things. Do you have any sovereignty concerns about that, if there are situations where the United States wants to send weapons? Iron Dome came up with Ukraine when the Israelis —
SECRETARY RUBIO: You’re asking about NDAA? Yeah, I mean, that – largely the Department of War manages that legislative portfolio, so I’m aware of the provision you’re discussing that involves cooperation on technology. And look, at the end of the day, the truth is we do that with countries all over the world.
QUESTION: So you support it?
SECRETARY RUBIO: I mean, if somebody – well, I haven’t read the specific provision in terms to tell you in detail. I understand – I understand the topic, though, because it’s not new. On air defense, for example, we’ve long cooperated with the Israelis. Look, if we have a breakthrough in our system or they have a breakthrough in theirs, we could share that in a way to improve our own systems as well. So if they’ve come up with some novel way of defeating drones, for example, of course we would want to have that and benefit from it. By the way, they’re not the only country in the world that we would do that with. We do that with other countries as well.
So I think that’s the provision you’re referring to, and that’s something we’re already doing. I mean, that’s something that already exists. But I don’t think there’s – that’s different from sovereignty. I mean, it’s not like U.S. forces are going to come under the command and control of a foreign general or anything of that nature.
QUESTION: But when Ukraine was asking for Iron Dome, the United States and some lawmakers, including Lindsey Graham, wanted the U.S. to send Iron Dome battery that was in the East Coast. Netanyahu vetoed that – that was co-production – he vetoed that —
SECRETARY RUBIO: Well – yeah, yeah, but any time you enter into co-production, we have those restrictions too. I mean, if we provide weaponry to a country and it’s part of an agreement, they can’t transfer that to a third country without our approval. That’s – we do the same thing. And Israel’s not the only country in the world that does it. Other countries do it with their systems as well. That’s just a normal way – when you do arms sales, part of the restrictions is you get to veto them passing it on to a third country. That’s not just us or Israel; it’s every country.
{SOURCE}
Wha?? Very interesting… take a listen. In fact, listen to this twice.
Rep. Lauren Boebert addressed why she missed a critical vote on the (NDAA) Section 219, US-Israel Defense Integration Into the annual defense bill.
Boebert said unnamed GOP staffers “lied to her” during…
— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) July 23, 2026
I believe it’s incredibly naive to believe that once the door is opened slightly that it won’t be kicked all the way opened later. The bottom line is this is a bad idea that will have consequences we’ll pay for later. Same as it ever was…
Unfortunately another step towards peonage. Regarding the USS Liberty our troops were killed and Jonathan Pollard, the most consequential spy according to IC, gave Israel our most sensitive secrets and now Section 219/224 will not be a benefit to the US. Finally, if you disagree with Israel/AIPAC, you’re a racist/antisemite.
We do the same thing with multiple countries and have been for decades.
Even assuming you are correct, two wrongs don’t make a right. Something, something foreign entanglements. Americans ought to be demanding our government pull out of them all.
Didn’t AOC jump in on X and tell people it was a merger? She was soundly corrected.
Israel being but a piece of the puzzle, how about we don’t do this with any country? I dont trust any country out there, unfortunately my own also. Even if I did trust Trump, why would I want this legislation knowing another different intentioned administration could interpret things or do things differently? There is absolutely no need for this in the NDAA, especially if we already do this with other countries outside of the NDAA
Logical & well reasoned response, thank you.
You do realize we do this with multiple countries and we have been for decades?
“So I think that’s the provision you’re referring to, and that’s something we’re already doing. I mean, that’s something that already exists.”
So then we don’t need Sec. 219. It already exists. Get it out of the NDAA.
It was previously Sec. 224 and has been in every NDAA for years.
From the article:
”SECRETARY RUBIO: I mean, if somebody – well, I haven’t read the specific provision in terms to tell you in detail…”
If true, maybe he should get the details before giving a generic response…
I don’t know, just makes me not quite trust that he knows the answer if he doesn’t actually have the facts.
What do ya’ll think?
I think we’ve been doing this with Israel and other countries for decades and that this is just another pressure point for the leftists who have infiltrated the MAGA movement to try to drive another wedge.
Does the CIA approve of this? No other opinion matters.
“Does the CIA approve of this?”
If the CIA didn’t approve of it then it wouldn’t exist. The question to ask is if this was this the CIA’s idea all along. Ultimately the sale of weapons is central to the conversation. Whether the sales are covert or not, it’s also a prime revenue stream for the CIA.
Just as lucrative patents for “vaxxxines” et al are to the CDC…very.
Source?
Dr David E Martin, patent expert.
I can’t stand Boebert! She’s as fake as Luna!
So if we do this with other countries, why do we need a special section for “Israel” called out in an NDAA?
I don’t trust Israel.
What Rubio says is true, for many prior years …
‘…I understand the topic, though, because it’s not new. On air defense, for example, we’ve long cooperated with the Israelis….’
There have been people, defense contractors, associated with Offut air force base (Omaha), that have met with Israel
and vice versa…for many prior years.
And furthermore, that provision that someone is giving sunlight, has been within d c, congressional approved funding agreements for a long, long time.
p.s.
the biotechnology part of the provision, is new to some people
p.s.
it is better to cooperate,
than to have technology stolen [ which some countries do ] or
to have some people in the usa sell it to other countries – without people knowing.
p.s.
and yes, when an armament, or technology is used vs. an opponent,
that also opens up the opportunity for the opponent to reverse engineer the armament from the remnants.
( i.e. the russia hyper sonic missiles will not be unique, forever… )
p.s.
does anyone wonder why automobiles, bicycles, planes, trains, pencils, computers look and function similarly across the world?
hmmm…
yet, europe does have its castles from a prior era …
and other countries do have some unique architecture to their buildings etc.
imho
Noticed comments on twitter/X the other day about the US supposedly turning over our military into a subsidiary of Israel’s and thought someone left the looney tune gate open so put it into the 72-hour before thinking about it category.
Now reading this glad it was put into that 72-hour box as this makes perfect sense so the U.S. agencies can openly work with Israel while our agencies can learn and incorporate Israel’s technology for creating our own version of their Iron Dome protection system.
No, I do not support it. The United States should operate completely independent of any country in our military and Intelligence affairs. We should design and build all our defensive and offensive military weaponry ourselves, and everything including all components and spare parts should be manufactured in the Continental United States by United States citizens.