The UN passed the resolution calling it genocide so I agree with that, I trust a democratic vote of the UN despite their inability to actually do anything compared to South Africa. I'm still going to vote Biden though because I know about project 2025 and know that we will probably get genocided in our own country if he loses. It sucks but that's how I feel.
If the only thing Biden ever does is keep Trump from office it will be a net win.
The IRA and the CHIPS Act were pretty legit - granted, I think trump might've passed some version of the CHIPS act as well. Seems like a no-brainer, imo, but the one that did it gets the credit!
The IRA even addresses the corporate tax loopholes in a clever way. There's a minimum tax that they still have to pay even if their normal tax burden comes out to $0. I think it's like 15%.
Project 2025 is a conservative plan to immediately reshape the executive branch and replace most people with Trump loyalists immediately if he wins. It includes dismantling the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, because while Republicans like to claim to be tough on crime, they really don't like an independently functioning Justice Department that has shown their leader to be a criminal.
Remember this is essentially what the dictator of China did to seize power in the 2000s. Ascend the ranks and replace people who didn't agree with him.
A maga movement to seize power and turn the US into a theocratic dictatorship.
A fascist purging of government the Republicans have planned if Trump wins.
Yet another reason the working class must NEVER disarm.
Yeah. Although I doubt Americans will ever have the balls to actually properly revolt. By the time it would get bad enough for them to actually consider taking up arms seriously there will be robot dog armies and it will be moot.
Damn, that's at least a full step above a "Huh" with an inquisitively arched eyebrow.
His finger is dangerously close to wagging.
Like Mutumbo?
I don't know if he'd go THAT far.
😂
You know what would aid Gaza? Not giving money and weapons to the people blowing them up
Wrote this before and I'll write it again. People need to understand the broader context here:
Tough for Biden to balance between:
Leaning too heavily into Israel and siding with genocide.
Leaning too heavily against, and being accused of being pro-Hamas.
Worse, if Biden withdraws all aid to Israel and then Israel is hit with another terrorist attack, manufactured or not, that's the end of Biden. I think we can all agree that right-wing media propaganda is very effective and the ads would write themselves.
Within the electorate resides Jewish Americans who still largely support Israel by the polling, and the progressives and Palestinian Americans (a far smaller voting bloc).
The best Biden is going to manage in toeing the line is singling out Netanyahu (who himself is unpopular in Israel) instead of Israel itself and actions like this.
The risk obviously being that if Biden loses this election, the guy who wouldn't just indirectly but likely directly commit genocide against Palestinians would come in and you certainly wouldn't hear the words, "indiscriminate bombing" from Trump's facial sphincter.
Leaning too heavily into Israel and siding with genocide.
Leaning too heavily against, and being accused of being pro-Hamas.
So the choices are siding with genocide, and merely being accused of being pro-Hamas?
Seems like a clear choice, since accusations of being pro-Hamas get flung around for merely wanting to genocide Palestinians just more slowly.
It shouldn’t be this difficult for an actual leader to stop politicking and do the right thing. This is like Bill Clinton ignoring the Rwandan genocide. Or Reagan collaborating with the Guatemalan genocide. Or Nixon ignoring the Bengali genocide and directing the Cambodian genocide that enabled the Khmer Rouge genocide. On second thought, Biden’s an exemplary United States President. /s
This is like Bill Clinton ignoring the Rwandan genocide
Arguably this is because he didn't ignore the Bosniak genocide but then NATO was criticized for getting involved.
It's my personal belief that we should intervene militarily to stop genocides, but there's influential "leftist" thinkers who seem to disagree. Some will still say the US shouldn't have gotten involved with Kosovo, and I believe Chomsky notoriously denied the Cambodian genocide was even happening.
Of course, the right answer is to say fuck these people and get involved anyway. We shouldn't bow to political disagreement when it comes to stopping genocides.
It would not be the end for Biden. That's hyperbole. Also why are we pressuring anti genocide people to come out and vote regardless, but taking it for granted that pro genocide people can't be pressured at all.
You know who you're never going to get to vote for Biden again? The Muslim communities that are actually in mourning right now because they know people dying in Gaza. The same ones that are key voting groups in the Rust Belt. Which is the same area that Trump used to win in 2016.
The Republicans are already calling him terrorist pedophile. Doing something to stop the GOP from running baseless attack ads is useless.
The only one trying to lose this election is Biden. There are legions of progressives ready to hold their noses and vote for him. But he keeps running to the right. And we'll keep staying home.
You're saying he'd be fine if a terrorist attack occurred after withdrawing aid to Israel? Sorry I just can't agree with that. He'd be toast and the 7 million Jewish Americans would turn on him in a second, amplified all the more by right-wing propaganda that doesn't just influence Republicans but the centrists and even many Democrats.
He's doing quite the opposite from running to the right. He's completely shifted his position from lockstep support for Israel to letting ceasefire votes go through and publicly calling out Netanyahu.
Biden already signaled he'd be harder on Israel than Trump. There really isn't any more that needs to be said. It's holding the nose and supporting Biden now for the next 8 months or suffer 4 years of the far, far worse guy.
Yup so hard. So many hard words like, "here's those bombs you wanted."
Worse, if Biden withdraws all aid to Israel and then Israel is hit with another terrorist attack, manufactured or not, that’s the end of Biden. I think we can all agree that right-wing media propaganda is very effective and the ads would write themselves.
Just scream "vote blue no matter who" at the pro-Israel Biden supporters.
I'm sick of people not saying the quiet part out loud: If every time there is a choice between doing the things progressives and leftists want the threat of moderate and liberal voters abandoning the party then we're fucked anyway. Even if you're optimistic and say "No no, the number of progressives and leftists is growing! We just have to be patient!" Guess what happens when progressives and leftists finally start winning primaries? That's right, moderates and liberals will abandon the party.
There no point in delaying any longer. If the moderates and liberals will abandon the party if Biden stopped sending weapons to Israel then let's get it over with.
That phrase was never meant for center right democrats, it was only there to sheepdog those who demand candidates not beholden to the billionaire class. You can't "vote blue no matter who" those types, they'll vote republican because at the end of the day most of them belong to social classes not threatened by conservatism, 4 years is no skin off their back, they may even see their IRAs grow. We're nothing but a voting bloc to them, and that's why things like Malcolm X's quote on white moderates is so relatable to many non black progressives, both groups know what it's like to be only included in appearance and only spoken to when votes are needed. How many more black elected officials do we have now, and yet the Democrats still fail Black voters perennially. I would have to ignore 60 year of history to think the progressive cause would do better if (and that's a big if) we can get more of them elected. If there's a path forward through the democratic party, it's eluded the black community for long enough to see cop lynchings increase and I don't think 'progressive issues' like 'stop killing the environment before we all die' have the time necessary to go the same route that's been taken from Malcolm X to now.
These are his 'only' choices only because identifying the broader issue of Israeli occupation and settlement (the core complaints of Palestinians and the reason why Hamas exists) puts at risk US interests in the region - namely Israel's projection of strength throughout the middle east.
The protection of US neo-colonial and imperial interests is the reason why Biden is in a tough position, and the reason why leftists will never be satisfied by stern words by Biden.
Oh no, he will be accused of being pro-Hamas. Just like when you criritize him you are accused of being pro-Trump, or if you critize evil NATO countries are doing, you are called pro-Russian.
If people are that stupid to not see this clear tactic that everyone who critiques me must support my enemies, then you should maybe they shouldn't use the same tactic when it suits them.
It's a waste of time — Especially in an election year with so much on the line and post-primaries — to criticize Biden and instead better to criticize the groups who continue to support Israel. When the polls shift, the administration will shift... As has already occurred.
I don't give a fuck if you do, so long as you vote and support Biden in November. Palestinians and Ukrainians are counting on us, and the guaranteed-alternative is significantly-worse. I just had some other fool tell me they're voting 3rd-party, so they are clearly supporting the enemies. I hope you're smarter.
Except that the voting uncommitted has actually worked to move Biden on the issue (Dems calling for an election in Israel).
Has it? The real issue convincing those who are undecided or supportive of Israeli action; it's less to do with the minority progressives threatening to not vote because everyone knows progressives will hold their nose. But it's the swing-voter moderates and centrists who are less informed on the issues and easily-swayable by political talking-points — and who make up a far larger chunk of the electorate — that Biden is concerned about. When 1/3 are unsure if Israel is committing genocide and 1/3 say they're not, that is a problem.
It’s a waste of time — Especially in an election year with so much on the line and post-primaries — to criticize Biden and instead better to criticize the groups who continue to support Israel. When the polls shift, the administration will shift… As has already occurred.
It is clear as day that the only thing actually making Biden think twice about unconditionally supporting the mass slaughter of Palestinians is that he might actually lose the election because his opinions are so unpopular and brutal on the Palestinian genocide.
Right now is THE TIME to grind everything about the Democratic Party to a halt until Biden gets the message that halting the supply of weapons to an ongoing genocide is a non-negotiable aspect of getting leftist (and muslim) voters. He doesn’t give a shit though that much is clear, once the election is over if he wins than all the pressure to actually do anything other than say empty words goes away.
As I've repeatedly pointed out, the problem is this can only go so far before it works against him. All Democrats are doing is splitting his attention between two groups — and if he pivots too much to one side, he risks alienating an arguably even LARGER group of voters.
So as I said, the best bet is to focus not on finger-wagging to Biden, but finger-wagging to the actual Pro-Israelis and undecided (who are 1/3 of the electorate). Thus if you want to continue influencing Biden, continue influencing the polls themselves and Biden will reflect that.
He doesn’t give a shit though that much is clear, once the election is over if he wins than all the pressure to actually do anything other than say empty words goes away.
I think it's just the opposite. I think similar to the Afghan withdrawal once an election has passed he will take a very Anti-Israeli stance while amplifying his support for Ukraine as well.
He had no issues welcoming Nikki Haley voters to become part of his base probably because he knows how hard this election will be to win without the help of progressives and leftists. But he chose to move right instead of left, so he shouldn't be surprised when people start treating him like a 2000s era republican.
How has he moved right? Welcoming Haley voters is a sound strategy that is not mutually-exclusive to moving left, which he absolutely has on the topic of Israel.
Welcoming Haley voters is moving right. Defunding the UNRWA is moving right. The spending bill he was happy to sign still sends billions to Israel. Also, in that bill, it would limit aid to the Palestinian Authority if “the Palestinians initiate an International Criminal Court (ICC) judicially authorized investigation, or actively supports such an investigation, that subjects Israeli nationals to an investigation for alleged crimes against Palestinians.” Biden being more than willing to sign a "snitches get stitches" bill, bullying the rest of the world into letting Israel do whatever they want surely isn't moving left.
Tell me, what policy change has Biden made to appeal to Haley voters?
I suppose you've heard that old adage of "if a person sits at a table with 9 nazis, there are 10 nazis at the table". When trump welcomed the proud boys to his campaign, I had no doubt in my mind he was willing to cooperate with them to enact policy that would strengthen his coalition, and I feel the same about Biden with Haley Voters. It doesn't help your case that he's already pretty conservative to begin with.
I suppose you've heard that old adage of, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." After all, we sort of utilized that during WWII to fight the nazis,
So he hasn't moved his policies whatsoever for Haley voters; he's only appealing to never-Trump voters in order to ensure the real fascist doesn't get elected. You following?
They don't shift policies, they shift marketing. They will continue to support Israel because they are treating you with Trump and you have to vote for them whatever they do. So change is never going to happen.
Either vote third party or don't waste your time voting. You are getting nothing better with democrats. Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections. In next elections they will simply move the goal post and get someone even worse for Republican party and whatever you are voting against in these elections will be the democrat position in the next one.
Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections.
Either vote third party or don’t waste your time voting. You are getting nothing better with democrats. Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections. In next elections they will simply move the goal post and get someone even worse for Republican party and whatever you are voting against in these elections will be the democrat position in the next one.
Ladies and gentlemen, a wedge-driving operative seeking to undermine Democrats and get Trump into office. There is literally zero evidence that "Trump is a candidate that was placed there by Democrats". There is zero historical evidence voting third party does anything more than get the worse of two evils in office — and Ukrainians and Palestinians would much prefer Biden over Trump any day.
This is the rhetoric of someone either not either not familiar with the political system, or intentionally trying to undermine the left by opening the door for conservatives.
This is the rhetoric of someone either not either not familiar with the political system, or intentionally trying to undermine the left by opening the door for conservatives.
false dichotomy. they may be familiar with the political system (even more than you or i), and not believe the same things you do. they may be a leftist. you are making up attacks on their person instead of dealing with the substance of their claims.
No, commie (username), I'm simply grounded in reality.
that's a thought-terminating cliche like saying it's common sense. if you can't support your position, that's no reason to go off attacking other people as malevolent or incompetent.
My original statements remain largely untouched; it's not my issue you deflected the aforementioned points. Why proceed further?
you deflected the aforementioned points.
this is ambiguous. what do you mean?
Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.
There is zero historical evidence voting third party does anything more than get the worse of two evils in office
no such evidence is possible: you can't prove a counterfactual. you can't know who the worse evil would be. further it's not clear that so-called "third party" voters actually impact elections at all unless their candidate wins.
No, we can. 3rd parties have been around for decades and won nothing and only exacerbated the goals of said parties by undermining the only party that has tangible results.
You prove my point.
we can.
it's impossible to prove a counterfactual. you are either unfamiliar with the scientific method or you are deliberately lying.
3rd parties have been around for decades and won nothing and only exacerbated the goals of said parties by undermining the only party that has tangible results.
this simply isn't true and reflects a myopic view of history. so-called third parties have been with us almost since the inception of the us, and have accomplished things inconceivable to modern politicians.
It simply is true. Even the longest serving Independent in congressional history caucuses and ran as a Democrat.
But do tell what any third party from Libertarians to the Green Party have accomplished, relative to Democrats for the working class.
Have you even heard of Nader or Perot?
Even the longest serving Independent in congressional history caucuses and ran as a Democrat.
so? that doesn't prove that so-called third parties are impotent. it shows that one person made some questionable decisions.
"Questionable decisions," said the individual who had to dig back 100 years to find an example of any tangible progress made by such a 3rd-party...?
I think I'll go with the party that actually has a track-record of progress this half-century.
Nobody in the entire country would've disagreed with that strategy at the time, for quite literally everyone including Republicans thought Trump would doom the party. Hindsight is 20/20
That, however isn't the same as saying Trump is a Democratic plant colluding in disguise lol.
Trump is a Democratic plant colluding in disguise
no one said that.
Nobody in the entire country would’ve disagreed with that strategy at the time
you are now shifting the goalposts from "it didn't happen" to "it was a good idea".
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.
lol.
an appeal to ridicule
lol logged into a different account I see, wow.
(funny this is the only comment you didn't respond to, isn't it FederatingIsToohard LOL)
Hamas releasing all hostages in exchange for a cease-fire.
But they won’t. The PR bonanza — successful, by the sound of apparently ~99% of this community — at the expense of civilian innocents has been too good to stop anything, yet.
I am really disappointed with the discourse concerning Biden's handling of the most recent Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Everyone is acting like Biden invented our alliance with Israel and is somehow personally responsible for our support of Israel. Geopolitical alliances are complicated matters that touch everything from international reputation to national security. They are fostered over decades. We have obligations to Israel that precede Biden and the recent conflict.
I understand the moral positions people are taking, and I agree that a genocide is taking place. But with anything geopolitical, these issues must be approached without hard lines and moral absolutism, because those ideals are what both sides are using to justify the atrocities we are witnessing. They both feel morally justified, and that the other side has crossed some hard lines. That is how diplomacy breaks down.
Those of you that want to see an end to the conflict need to understand that the official US position at this moment is aligned with you. But so many of you are proposing "simple" solutions that will not achieve that outcome. If we end support for Israel, they will not stop the genocide. What we will lose is leverage in negotiating peace and we will weaken the alliance with Israel, and the genocide will continue unhindered by US calls for restraint. You may argue that Israel relies on this alliance for security, and that is true, but you assume that other super powers would not jump at the chance to replace the US as a close ally to a nuclear power in the middle east.
Let's not forget how rash reactionary approaches to geopolitics threatened the NATO alliance during the Trump presidency. Our allies are already doubting if the US will honor the treaty, and this doubt extends to Taiwan, too. Weakening these alliances gives power to our enemies, full stop. Do you want to see war break out in the Pacific? Russia to expand its empire eastward? The Israel-Palestine conflict to extend to other Arab nations? Damaging these alliances will cause more war, not less.
Outrage against Israel is justified. But look past your nose before you jeopardize our key alliances. Diplomacy is slow and frustrating, but it is better than more war.
But look past your nose before you jeopardize our key alliances. Diplomacy is slow and frustrating, but it is better than more war.
There's a genocide happening right now with USA support where thousand of childrens have already been murdered. Israel is bombing neighbor countries and the whole middle east is boiling as a result. They are not seeking diplomacy they are seeking war.
So we should abandon diplomacy precisely when it is needed most? When we withdraw our support and Iran and Egypt join the conflict, will it be easier to stomach the killing of even more children in more nations? After we cede our influence in the middle east and China expands its influence to fill the vacuum, we will be able to honor our treaty with Taiwan after an emboldened China begins bombing and killing their children?
This is the macabre calculus of geopolitics. This is the risk of reactionary policy. All of this is a hypothetical worse case scenario, but one thing is certain: if we withdraw our support, Israel will lose any incentive to stop the killing. More will die. And that would be the best case scenario.
diplomacy
To send israel government "whatever it needs" and additional aid is the opposite of diplomacy. The really reason they are getting away with a genocide is because they have the west backing.
There's a genocide happening right now under your nose where thousand of kids are getting killed, this is already the worst case scenario.
They are doing exactly what they want to do, they are not seeking diplomacy they want war.
You just stated the point of OPs post. It's not like when we sent arms to them since the 80s Biden was suddenly like "ok go kill babies". We should definitely suspend future transactions until at least the end of the current government term though. This whole US is equally responsible is a bit much though.
If genocide isn't a red line for sending military aid then our alliances are already useless. We are the country and the country is us; not some third entity. So a moral failure of this magnitude being forced on us "for the good of our country" just opens the door to more moral failures. And we're the ones that will have to live in that system.
Furthermore, allies who do have moral standards are now looking at us wondering if our moral failures will extend to keeping our word when it's not a country that's entangled itself with our religious conservatives. They are very aware of why we support Israel. And very aware that they do not share Israel's unique political position.
It's that enough big picture stuff for you or would like to attempt to rationalize sending weapons to a genocidal regime some more?
Also a genocide is basically something where all kinds of crime are encompassed. Keeping an alliance despite genocide, maybe counterintuitively, makes one less trustworthy of an ally, because an alliance is an agreement, a contract to be held in good faith. There were obligations and agreements taken to not partake in such things, some even directly to the victims.
I'm never leaving lemmy. I love the way it's common to see normal sane views being widely accepted. I can breathe here.
This is one of those ones that sounds rational but really isn't.
Nobody said we have to leave Israel completely in the wind. They just want weapons deliveries to stop. Other countries aren't worried about Democrats holding their alliances. They're worried the Democrats are following the Republicans down the hole and supporting extreme religious parties. You show your allies you value them by listening to them, not by vetoing their anti starvation measures in the UN for several months.
It's really refreshing. We do have our share of crazies, as my block list can attest, but for the most part people are willing to accept that sometimes situations can be really complicated.
I’m never leaving lemmy. I love the way it’s common to see normal sane views being widely accepted.
A lot of astroturfing bots though.
:/
Oh?
Ohh.
What I really like about here is that nuance is understood and accepted. Very few people have a "bomb, baby, bomb!" approach. We largely agree that this violence is a tragic genocide and needs to stop. But we also understand the political reality in the US, and what our options are. And I think people have done a good job of successfully bringing Biden around on this.
What I really like about here is that nuance is understood and accepted.
Biden didn't invent the alliance to Israel, but when the conflict increased during his term he side-stepped congress to give weapons to them faster, so they can kill more civilians as quick as possible.
Don't excuse for what he has done. Biden is a war criminal.
And having NATO, most powerful minitarly alliance in the World, threatened is no comparison to genocide in Gaza. NATO is a problem just as well, but Israel needs to be stopped ASAP.
Calling the situation complicated and saying there is a lot of nuance has often been used as a cover for israel's campaign of terrorism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and now full-speed mask-off genocide. The official US position amounts to nothing because it's two-faced. Biden will claim he is doing what he can while he bypasses congress and otherwise sneaks weapons to israel to continue the genocide. You ask about theoretical wars while downplaying a genocide happening right now. Somehow you think caring about genocide is rash, but being paranoid about imaginary wars is rational. I don't know what your intentions are, but your post sounds like a PR piece, urging us to stay calm and take things slow so that israel can complete its mission of genocide in peace.
"They have a point," Biden said after the protesters were escorted out. "We need to get a lot more care into Gaza."
They wouldn't need it as badly if someone didn't go around Congress to ban funding to UNRWA...
Still, the Biden administration decided to pause funding, and other big donors did the same. The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, says she understands that UNRWA is the only international organization with the capacity to help deliver food, flour and fuel to Palestinians in Gaza, but she says donors want to see a full investigation of the Israeli allegations.
And even after we found out the allegations were bullshit and confessions were after torture, both parties (except a few progressives) united to ban it till 2025.
Biden is literally responsible for this, but is acting like it's just some random thing and maybe he'll help out.
You're not entirely wrong, but Biden has bipartisan backing on this as it's part of the whole funding bill, which makes most of the repesentatives and senators complicit with Biden which this bill also gives Israel $3B, and Ukraine $0.3B.
Still, like how a massive frigate turns slowly, the actions of the State Department are showing a change of tune, and the US is nearly fed up with covering for Israel's genocide. The first steps are to abstain from ceasefire resolutions and then to give the protestors attention and credibility. There are many more steps to go.
Republicans are always gonna disrupt any real action anyway, they are full mask-off on the Christian nationalism thing and believe they must support Isreal 100% no matter what to make jesus come back.
I'd really like to believe that but the cynic in me expects that as soon as Israel gets done with their genocide campaign they'll pretend that they've turned a new leaf and all funding and military assistance will resume as though nothing had happened. There will be no lasting consequences for Israel's actions so they will, correctly, assume that there is nothing to stop them from doing it again.
There will be no lasting consequences for Israel’s actions so they will, correctly, assume that there is nothing to stop them from doing it again.
Not concrete political action no, but make no mistake Israel has lost a lot of international support in this war, and support for them is now more concentrated among older people. I'll be cautiously hopeful that we'll see real change from the West in the next 20 or so years as the older generations die off and more people grow up hearing about Israel committing their second genocide.
I hope you're right.
nearly fed up with covering for Israel’s genocide
The US is doing far more than covering for it, we are enabling it via massive funding and contributing the very bombs being used to decimate Gaza and murder 10s of thousands of civilians. Biden’s willingness to let Bibi order us around and use us as cover is absolutely pathetic - Biden, and by proxy the US, are completely captured by the far-right extremist government of a foreign nation state. This is the weakest posturing imaginable for a world leader, and it’s entirely because Biden is a genocidal Zionist freak.
“Bipartisan backing” in DC means one thing only - Congress is getting paid. It’s gross that AIPAC can buy air cover for a genocide so easily, but such is the extent of corruption in the US.
We are 6 months into this ethnic cleansing, and these baby steps are not nearly enough at this juncture. For fuck’s sake even Trump beat Biden to the natural conclusion of demanding Israel put a stop to this. The bar is so low it’s literally on the ground and Biden just faceplants in front of it. Pathetic.
"I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Martin Luther King Jr., Letter from the Birmingham Jail
bill also gives Israel $3B, and Ukraine $0.3B.
You forgot banning aid to UNRWA....
the US is nearly fed up with covering for Israel’s genocide.
Voters are, and have been.
But can you name a Dem in a party leadership position that doesn't take AIPAC money?
There are many more steps to go.
That's what they told FDR 80 years ago when he was trying to get universal healthcare past a Dem controlled Congress...
There's so many steps left to go, it's functionally infinite. Because Republicans take more steps back then Dems take forward.
Biden spent a billion dollars in 2020 to just barely convince voters he was better than trump. I don't know you, but if you had a billion dollar campaign, I bet you could have wiped the floor with trump.
Wait are we electing @rentlar as the Lemmy candidate? I dunno if they're eligible.
They wouldn’t need it as badly if someone didn’t go around Congress to ban funding to UNRWA…
Or if someone hadn't sold Netanyahu weapons in the first place. Or if someone didn't run interference for Netanyahu at the UN.
but she says donors want to see a full investigation of the Israeli allegations.
both parties (except a few progressives) united to ban it till 2025.
How is Biden literally responsible for everyone uniting on that point?
He went around Congress to give billions to Israel, and to ban aid to UNRWA causing mass starvation
Then Congress included both in the budget.
Any other questions?
Any comment on the fact that donors paying for aid to UNRWA wanted this, or that it was bipartisan and - as you just pointed out - it was Congress that put it in the budget?
Why is everything all Biden's fault, when you have already said in multiple points that other people were pushing for it also?
Why is everything all Biden’s fault
Because he's the boss. The president is always considered the leader of their party while they're in office. That's why Truman said, "The buck stops here."
If an organization does something, the leader of that organization needs to accept responsibility or admit they're an ineffective leader.
If you have the power to unilaterally hinder a genocide and instead you use that power to enable it, you are culpable.
He's definitely culpable, but he's far from the only one.
Sure, just the one with the most ability to act on his own. His culpability is proportional to that. He's used that ability previously to aid Israel, he could use that same power to hinder them, but chooses not to.
the one with the most ability to act on his own
Maybe 3 years ago he would've been, but right now, with an election coming up against Trump and his Maggats, he's in a very precarious position.
Why is everything all Biden’s fault
Because before it was included in the budget, Biden went around Congress to do both via executive order.
And I think the other bit is you're confused about what "donors" meant, like are you thinking it's private citizens donating money and the government now won't let them?
I'm not trying to be insulting, but from context that seems to be your impression
'We have not found them to be in violation, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or the provision of humanitarian assistance,' the State Department said
posts something the Biden did not say
That's Bidens demands
No fucking shit decent human beings have a point, that could easily be taken as dismissal.
Please act, and end Israel's reign of horror.
you have a point now shut up
I'm wondering just how damageable in terms of geopolitics would a deterioration of relations with Israel be. Cause it has to be huge to justify not acting on this genocide. What stops Biden/US from acting ? what can I read to better understand this issue ?
the US sees Israel as the only thing it can control in the middle east. it was always meant to be one of a few "pro-democracy beachheads" in the area, with the US attempting to make iraq work the same way in the 2000s. The idea was to put Israel in a position where they were powerful compared to their enemies but dependent on foreign aid, so that they could do whatever they want as long as they also did whatever we want. This is straight out of the British post-colonial hegemonic playbook - you don't send people to take over, and instead you elevate one local group from second or third place to the top and then make sure they never develop enough power that they can remain on top without your help. If you do this successfully, you can control them completely because all you have to do to send them tumbling from power is nothing when they're counting on your support.
Up until now, the impact of helping Israel didn't have to be all that massive because the impact of Israeli violence against Palestinians (edit: ON THE OPINION OF THE AVERAGE AMERICAN) wasn't either. What you're seeing is a replay of the US allowing anyone with a camera to report from Vietnam - the narrative used to be pretty tightly controlled but between Palestinian social media updates and Israel's internal jingoistic propaganda being leaked to the western world it's becoming harder and harder to sustain the whole 'most moral army in the world engaged in a limited defensive operation that respects the right of all law-abiding people to live in peace' narrative. We see them shooting at people gathered around aid trucks now. We hear them talking about "children of light vs children of darkness", "every Palestinian is a terrorist because they all support Hamas" and seizing all of Palestine to build beachfront condos. Americans tend to like war in theory, but we have a strong sense of fair play and we'll only stay on board up to a certain amount of video of unarmed people being mowed down by soldiers. This is why they're simultaneously softening their position on Palestine and moving to seize the only major social media outlet that isn't US-based (and therefore isn't able to be pressured about 'misinformation' the way that FB, X, reddit, etc are). It's a matter of appeasing us in order to stay in power now while moving behind the scenes to ensure that they control the narrative in future so that they're never again put in a position where they're beholden to the will of voters who think that foreign people are people.
point one is also why the chosen rhetoric in opposition of the genocide is targeted at Netanyahu specifically rather than the entire administration, because rather than loosing relations with Israel as a country, the US wants to oust Netanyahu and have someone else they support take his place. That way they can keep their post-colonial pet in the middle east without looking like they're (still) supporting a genocide.
The problems with this, though, are:
the US would still be engaged in a post-colonial imperialist action in the Middle East
the broader Israel-Palestine relationship will almost certainly stay the same regardless, and I think a lot of American's opinion on Israel has been pretty irrevocably damaged since this new phase of conflict started.
you're absolutely right. nothing good ever happens just because it's good, and this is no different. brandon is currently trying to figure out a way to keep power in both America and the middle east, and built into the british model for post-settler-colonial hegemony is the precise lever that he's trying to pull. Namely "either you quit fucking this up for me or I'll fuck everything up for you so badly that you'll cease to exist"
seizing all of Palestine to build beachfront condos
Whoever buys that land to make those needs to be harassed for the rest of their lives. That's absolute scum of the earth bullshit. Religion and real estate all in one gigantic shit storm... Literally the worst humanity has to offer.
Jared Kushner I believe is the one who suggested displacing Palestinians to build luxury buildings and vacation hotspots.
So yeah, pretty much absolute scum of the earth. He can't be allowed near the White House ever again.
Thanks a bunch. Yeah that makes a lot of sense
This is straight out of the British post-colonial hegemonic playbook
Which was historically just a way to prolong defeat. I wonder why don't Israelis see that they are going to end up like Rhodesia, if they don't choose some other strategy of existence for themselves.
It’s a matter of appeasing us in order to stay in power now while moving behind the scenes to ensure that they control the narrative in future so that they’re never again put in a position where they’re beholden to the will of voters who think that foreign people are people.
Well, they may succeed, it happens.
If it is about Israel being the one thing the US can control in the middle east, I wonder then if this is not the US realizing it is losing control of their asset.
Israel uses a significant amount of the $$ the US gives them to lobby (IOW, bribe) members of the US political parties to support them. Including giving them more $$, in a positive feedback loop. The lobbied polits in effect give themselves money along with what Israel keeps.
This is the answer. Everything else may have been more true in the past. But the lobby has become so entrenched, that this is the answer.
Alright thanks for the clarification
What stops Biden/US from acting ?
Are red or blue going to lose the elections? They are making money and expanding their power why should they stop?
From my understanding, we need good relations with israel to have a stable military oresence in the middle east
I see. Appreciate the clarification
It would be terrible for the West
We would have to permanently ship around the cape of Africa and abandon oil based economies
It also brings about a large issue for future wars due to strategic positioning
And allies won’t trust the US to defend them so you’re better off aligning with Russia or China
Abandoning oil based economies is good.
Yes but when so much especially militarily relies on it, there is a big transition period where you/Europe/East Asia are vulnerable and hoping that Texas is enough
I am pro nuclear but I realize the biggest problem with it is that it is a military target
Dark Brandon, come forth and high five one of them.
It's been almost six months, you could've said something before now.
You didn't watch the State of the Union speech, huh?
I’ve found the whole ‘genocide joe’ crowd very rarely listens to anything joe actually says and live off a drip feed of .ml misinfo posts
People can say whatever they want, but it's actions that matter. And his actions have generally been supportive of Israel, including going around Congress to give them aid and weapons and vetoing UN resolutions for ceasefires.
No, instead we watched his actions. Such as banning aid for the UNRWA, blocking Un resolutions against Israel, sidestepping congress to ship them weapons, ensuring billions in funding go their way.
But wow he was totally mean to them in a speech, i guess thats what matters.
Two protesters were escorted out of the Raleigh, North Carolina, venue after they cut off the president mid-remarks, shouting, "What about the health care in Gaza?"
Biden has faced numerous anti-war protests during his events in the months since the Israel-Hamas war began Oct. 7, and especially as calls have grown for his administration to take stronger action on the civilian death toll in Gaza.
In the weeks after he was interrupted about a dozen times during a January abortion rights speech, his team worked to minimize disruptions by making Biden's events smaller and withholding their precise locations longer than usual.
During his State of the Union address this month, Biden announced that he was directing the U.S. military to establish a "temporary pier in the Mediterranean on the Gaza coast" for aid delivery.
At the same time, Biden and top allies have ramped up criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government's approach to the war.
Biden, who served as vice president when the ACA was passed by Congress, has made preserving access to health care a central part of his re-election bid.
The original article contains 509 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
The UN passed the resolution calling it genocide so I agree with that, I trust a democratic vote of the UN despite their inability to actually do anything compared to South Africa. I'm still going to vote Biden though because I know about project 2025 and know that we will probably get genocided in our own country if he loses. It sucks but that's how I feel.
If the only thing Biden ever does is keep Trump from office it will be a net win.
The IRA and the CHIPS Act were pretty legit - granted, I think trump might've passed some version of the CHIPS act as well. Seems like a no-brainer, imo, but the one that did it gets the credit!
The IRA even addresses the corporate tax loopholes in a clever way. There's a minimum tax that they still have to pay even if their normal tax burden comes out to $0. I think it's like 15%.
What’s project 2025?
Project 2025 is a conservative plan to immediately reshape the executive branch and replace most people with Trump loyalists immediately if he wins. It includes dismantling the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, because while Republicans like to claim to be tough on crime, they really don't like an independently functioning Justice Department that has shown their leader to be a criminal.
Remember this is essentially what the dictator of China did to seize power in the 2000s. Ascend the ranks and replace people who didn't agree with him.
A maga movement to seize power and turn the US into a theocratic dictatorship.
A fascist purging of government the Republicans have planned if Trump wins.
Yet another reason the working class must NEVER disarm.
Yeah. Although I doubt Americans will ever have the balls to actually properly revolt. By the time it would get bad enough for them to actually consider taking up arms seriously there will be robot dog armies and it will be moot.
I hope I’m wrong though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025
Possible genocide in the USA should one of the two viable presidential candidates gets elected?
Will the democrats stop pursuing gun control considering this imminent threat of genocide?
SocialistRA.org
Damn, that's at least a full step above a "Huh" with an inquisitively arched eyebrow.
His finger is dangerously close to wagging.
Like Mutumbo?
I don't know if he'd go THAT far.
😂
You know what would aid Gaza? Not giving money and weapons to the people blowing them up
Wrote this before and I'll write it again. People need to understand the broader context here:
Tough for Biden to balance between:
Leaning too heavily into Israel and siding with genocide.
Leaning too heavily against, and being accused of being pro-Hamas.
Worse, if Biden withdraws all aid to Israel and then Israel is hit with another terrorist attack, manufactured or not, that's the end of Biden. I think we can all agree that right-wing media propaganda is very effective and the ads would write themselves.
Within the electorate resides Jewish Americans who still largely support Israel by the polling, and the progressives and Palestinian Americans (a far smaller voting bloc).
The best Biden is going to manage in toeing the line is singling out Netanyahu (who himself is unpopular in Israel) instead of Israel itself and actions like this.
The risk obviously being that if Biden loses this election, the guy who wouldn't just indirectly but likely directly commit genocide against Palestinians would come in and you certainly wouldn't hear the words, "indiscriminate bombing" from Trump's facial sphincter.
Leaning too heavily into Israel and siding with genocide.
Leaning too heavily against, and being accused of being pro-Hamas.
So the choices are siding with genocide, and merely being accused of being pro-Hamas?
Seems like a clear choice, since accusations of being pro-Hamas get flung around for merely wanting to genocide Palestinians just more slowly.
It shouldn’t be this difficult for an actual leader to stop politicking and do the right thing. This is like Bill Clinton ignoring the Rwandan genocide. Or Reagan collaborating with the Guatemalan genocide. Or Nixon ignoring the Bengali genocide and directing the Cambodian genocide that enabled the Khmer Rouge genocide. On second thought, Biden’s an exemplary United States President. /s
Arguably this is because he didn't ignore the Bosniak genocide but then NATO was criticized for getting involved.
It's my personal belief that we should intervene militarily to stop genocides, but there's influential "leftist" thinkers who seem to disagree. Some will still say the US shouldn't have gotten involved with Kosovo, and I believe Chomsky notoriously denied the Cambodian genocide was even happening.
Of course, the right answer is to say fuck these people and get involved anyway. We shouldn't bow to political disagreement when it comes to stopping genocides.
It would not be the end for Biden. That's hyperbole. Also why are we pressuring anti genocide people to come out and vote regardless, but taking it for granted that pro genocide people can't be pressured at all.
You know who you're never going to get to vote for Biden again? The Muslim communities that are actually in mourning right now because they know people dying in Gaza. The same ones that are key voting groups in the Rust Belt. Which is the same area that Trump used to win in 2016.
The Republicans are already calling him terrorist pedophile. Doing something to stop the GOP from running baseless attack ads is useless.
The only one trying to lose this election is Biden. There are legions of progressives ready to hold their noses and vote for him. But he keeps running to the right. And we'll keep staying home.
You're saying he'd be fine if a terrorist attack occurred after withdrawing aid to Israel? Sorry I just can't agree with that. He'd be toast and the 7 million Jewish Americans would turn on him in a second, amplified all the more by right-wing propaganda that doesn't just influence Republicans but the centrists and even many Democrats.
He's doing quite the opposite from running to the right. He's completely shifted his position from lockstep support for Israel to letting ceasefire votes go through and publicly calling out Netanyahu.
Biden already signaled he'd be harder on Israel than Trump. There really isn't any more that needs to be said. It's holding the nose and supporting Biden now for the next 8 months or suffer 4 years of the far, far worse guy.
Yup so hard. So many hard words like, "here's those bombs you wanted."
Just scream "vote blue no matter who" at the pro-Israel Biden supporters.
I'm sick of people not saying the quiet part out loud: If every time there is a choice between doing the things progressives and leftists want the threat of moderate and liberal voters abandoning the party then we're fucked anyway. Even if you're optimistic and say "No no, the number of progressives and leftists is growing! We just have to be patient!" Guess what happens when progressives and leftists finally start winning primaries? That's right, moderates and liberals will abandon the party.
There no point in delaying any longer. If the moderates and liberals will abandon the party if Biden stopped sending weapons to Israel then let's get it over with.
That phrase was never meant for center right democrats, it was only there to sheepdog those who demand candidates not beholden to the billionaire class. You can't "vote blue no matter who" those types, they'll vote republican because at the end of the day most of them belong to social classes not threatened by conservatism, 4 years is no skin off their back, they may even see their IRAs grow. We're nothing but a voting bloc to them, and that's why things like Malcolm X's quote on white moderates is so relatable to many non black progressives, both groups know what it's like to be only included in appearance and only spoken to when votes are needed. How many more black elected officials do we have now, and yet the Democrats still fail Black voters perennially. I would have to ignore 60 year of history to think the progressive cause would do better if (and that's a big if) we can get more of them elected. If there's a path forward through the democratic party, it's eluded the black community for long enough to see cop lynchings increase and I don't think 'progressive issues' like 'stop killing the environment before we all die' have the time necessary to go the same route that's been taken from Malcolm X to now.
These are his 'only' choices only because identifying the broader issue of Israeli occupation and settlement (the core complaints of Palestinians and the reason why Hamas exists) puts at risk US interests in the region - namely Israel's projection of strength throughout the middle east.
The protection of US neo-colonial and imperial interests is the reason why Biden is in a tough position, and the reason why leftists will never be satisfied by stern words by Biden.
Oh no, he will be accused of being pro-Hamas. Just like when you criritize him you are accused of being pro-Trump, or if you critize evil NATO countries are doing, you are called pro-Russian. If people are that stupid to not see this clear tactic that everyone who critiques me must support my enemies, then you should maybe they shouldn't use the same tactic when it suits them.
It's a waste of time — Especially in an election year with so much on the line and post-primaries — to criticize Biden and instead better to criticize the groups who continue to support Israel. When the polls shift, the administration will shift... As has already occurred.
I don't give a fuck if you do, so long as you vote and support Biden in November. Palestinians and Ukrainians are counting on us, and the guaranteed-alternative is significantly-worse. I just had some other fool tell me they're voting 3rd-party, so they are clearly supporting the enemies. I hope you're smarter.
Except that the voting uncommitted has actually worked to move Biden on the issue (Dems calling for an election in Israel).
Has it? The real issue convincing those who are undecided or supportive of Israeli action; it's less to do with the minority progressives threatening to not vote because everyone knows progressives will hold their nose. But it's the swing-voter moderates and centrists who are less informed on the issues and easily-swayable by political talking-points — and who make up a far larger chunk of the electorate — that Biden is concerned about. When 1/3 are unsure if Israel is committing genocide and 1/3 say they're not, that is a problem.
It is clear as day that the only thing actually making Biden think twice about unconditionally supporting the mass slaughter of Palestinians is that he might actually lose the election because his opinions are so unpopular and brutal on the Palestinian genocide.
Right now is THE TIME to grind everything about the Democratic Party to a halt until Biden gets the message that halting the supply of weapons to an ongoing genocide is a non-negotiable aspect of getting leftist (and muslim) voters. He doesn’t give a shit though that much is clear, once the election is over if he wins than all the pressure to actually do anything other than say empty words goes away.
As I've repeatedly pointed out, the problem is this can only go so far before it works against him. All Democrats are doing is splitting his attention between two groups — and if he pivots too much to one side, he risks alienating an arguably even LARGER group of voters.
So as I said, the best bet is to focus not on finger-wagging to Biden, but finger-wagging to the actual Pro-Israelis and undecided (who are 1/3 of the electorate). Thus if you want to continue influencing Biden, continue influencing the polls themselves and Biden will reflect that.
I think it's just the opposite. I think similar to the Afghan withdrawal once an election has passed he will take a very Anti-Israeli stance while amplifying his support for Ukraine as well.
He had no issues welcoming Nikki Haley voters to become part of his base probably because he knows how hard this election will be to win without the help of progressives and leftists. But he chose to move right instead of left, so he shouldn't be surprised when people start treating him like a 2000s era republican.
How has he moved right? Welcoming Haley voters is a sound strategy that is not mutually-exclusive to moving left, which he absolutely has on the topic of Israel.
Welcoming Haley voters is moving right. Defunding the UNRWA is moving right. The spending bill he was happy to sign still sends billions to Israel. Also, in that bill, it would limit aid to the Palestinian Authority if “the Palestinians initiate an International Criminal Court (ICC) judicially authorized investigation, or actively supports such an investigation, that subjects Israeli nationals to an investigation for alleged crimes against Palestinians.” Biden being more than willing to sign a "snitches get stitches" bill, bullying the rest of the world into letting Israel do whatever they want surely isn't moving left.
Tell me, what policy change has Biden made to appeal to Haley voters?
I suppose you've heard that old adage of "if a person sits at a table with 9 nazis, there are 10 nazis at the table". When trump welcomed the proud boys to his campaign, I had no doubt in my mind he was willing to cooperate with them to enact policy that would strengthen his coalition, and I feel the same about Biden with Haley Voters. It doesn't help your case that he's already pretty conservative to begin with.
I suppose you've heard that old adage of, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." After all, we sort of utilized that during WWII to fight the nazis,
So he hasn't moved his policies whatsoever for Haley voters; he's only appealing to never-Trump voters in order to ensure the real fascist doesn't get elected. You following?
Trump is a candidate that was placed there by the democrats so they can have a better chance in the elections.
Ladies and gentlemen, a wedge-driving operative seeking to undermine Democrats and get Trump into office. There is literally zero evidence that "Trump is a candidate that was placed there by Democrats". There is zero historical evidence voting third party does anything more than get the worse of two evils in office — and Ukrainians and Palestinians would much prefer Biden over Trump any day.
This is the rhetoric of someone either not either not familiar with the political system, or intentionally trying to undermine the left by opening the door for conservatives.
false dichotomy. they may be familiar with the political system (even more than you or i), and not believe the same things you do. they may be a leftist. you are making up attacks on their person instead of dealing with the substance of their claims.
No, commie (username), I'm simply grounded in reality.
that's a thought-terminating cliche like saying it's common sense. if you can't support your position, that's no reason to go off attacking other people as malevolent or incompetent.
My original statements remain largely untouched; it's not my issue you deflected the aforementioned points. Why proceed further?
this is ambiguous. what do you mean?
Please go back and read more closely; I'd rather not repeat myself.
no such evidence is possible: you can't prove a counterfactual. you can't know who the worse evil would be. further it's not clear that so-called "third party" voters actually impact elections at all unless their candidate wins.
No, we can. 3rd parties have been around for decades and won nothing and only exacerbated the goals of said parties by undermining the only party that has tangible results.
You prove my point.
it's impossible to prove a counterfactual. you are either unfamiliar with the scientific method or you are deliberately lying.
this simply isn't true and reflects a myopic view of history. so-called third parties have been with us almost since the inception of the us, and have accomplished things inconceivable to modern politicians.
It simply is true. Even the longest serving Independent in congressional history caucuses and ran as a Democrat.
But do tell what any third party from Libertarians to the Green Party have accomplished, relative to Democrats for the working class.
Have you even heard of Nader or Perot?
so? that doesn't prove that so-called third parties are impotent. it shows that one person made some questionable decisions.
"Questionable decisions," said the individual who had to dig back 100 years to find an example of any tangible progress made by such a 3rd-party...?
I think I'll go with the party that actually has a track-record of progress this half-century.
yes, and i also know that their candidacy had nothing to do with who won the two elections they are (erroneously) credited with spoiling.
They're (accurately) credited with spoiling said elections and it is yet another example of the complete toothless value of 3rd-parties.
the prohibition party got a constitutional amendment passed. the republican party completely usurped the whigs.
Damn! You had to go back over 100 years practically to the Whigs!
no, i don't.
https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/
Nobody in the entire country would've disagreed with that strategy at the time, for quite literally everyone including Republicans thought Trump would doom the party. Hindsight is 20/20
That, however isn't the same as saying Trump is a Democratic plant colluding in disguise lol.
no one said that.
you are now shifting the goalposts from "it didn't happen" to "it was a good idea".
an appeal to ridicule
lol logged into a different account I see, wow.
(funny this is the only comment you didn't respond to, isn't it FederatingIsToohard LOL)
Either vote third party or don’t waste your time voting.
You know what would really, really aid Gaza?
Hamas releasing all hostages in exchange for a cease-fire.
But they won’t. The PR bonanza — successful, by the sound of apparently ~99% of this community — at the expense of civilian innocents has been too good to stop anything, yet.
I am really disappointed with the discourse concerning Biden's handling of the most recent Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Everyone is acting like Biden invented our alliance with Israel and is somehow personally responsible for our support of Israel. Geopolitical alliances are complicated matters that touch everything from international reputation to national security. They are fostered over decades. We have obligations to Israel that precede Biden and the recent conflict.
I understand the moral positions people are taking, and I agree that a genocide is taking place. But with anything geopolitical, these issues must be approached without hard lines and moral absolutism, because those ideals are what both sides are using to justify the atrocities we are witnessing. They both feel morally justified, and that the other side has crossed some hard lines. That is how diplomacy breaks down.
Those of you that want to see an end to the conflict need to understand that the official US position at this moment is aligned with you. But so many of you are proposing "simple" solutions that will not achieve that outcome. If we end support for Israel, they will not stop the genocide. What we will lose is leverage in negotiating peace and we will weaken the alliance with Israel, and the genocide will continue unhindered by US calls for restraint. You may argue that Israel relies on this alliance for security, and that is true, but you assume that other super powers would not jump at the chance to replace the US as a close ally to a nuclear power in the middle east.
Let's not forget how rash reactionary approaches to geopolitics threatened the NATO alliance during the Trump presidency. Our allies are already doubting if the US will honor the treaty, and this doubt extends to Taiwan, too. Weakening these alliances gives power to our enemies, full stop. Do you want to see war break out in the Pacific? Russia to expand its empire eastward? The Israel-Palestine conflict to extend to other Arab nations? Damaging these alliances will cause more war, not less.
Outrage against Israel is justified. But look past your nose before you jeopardize our key alliances. Diplomacy is slow and frustrating, but it is better than more war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Israel_in_the_2023_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war
There's a genocide happening right now with USA support where thousand of childrens have already been murdered. Israel is bombing neighbor countries and the whole middle east is boiling as a result. They are not seeking diplomacy they are seeking war.
So we should abandon diplomacy precisely when it is needed most? When we withdraw our support and Iran and Egypt join the conflict, will it be easier to stomach the killing of even more children in more nations? After we cede our influence in the middle east and China expands its influence to fill the vacuum, we will be able to honor our treaty with Taiwan after an emboldened China begins bombing and killing their children?
This is the macabre calculus of geopolitics. This is the risk of reactionary policy. All of this is a hypothetical worse case scenario, but one thing is certain: if we withdraw our support, Israel will lose any incentive to stop the killing. More will die. And that would be the best case scenario.
To send israel government "whatever it needs" and additional aid is the opposite of diplomacy. The really reason they are getting away with a genocide is because they have the west backing.
There's a genocide happening right now under your nose where thousand of kids are getting killed, this is already the worst case scenario. They are doing exactly what they want to do, they are not seeking diplomacy they want war.
You just stated the point of OPs post. It's not like when we sent arms to them since the 80s Biden was suddenly like "ok go kill babies". We should definitely suspend future transactions until at least the end of the current government term though. This whole US is equally responsible is a bit much though.
If genocide isn't a red line for sending military aid then our alliances are already useless. We are the country and the country is us; not some third entity. So a moral failure of this magnitude being forced on us "for the good of our country" just opens the door to more moral failures. And we're the ones that will have to live in that system.
Furthermore, allies who do have moral standards are now looking at us wondering if our moral failures will extend to keeping our word when it's not a country that's entangled itself with our religious conservatives. They are very aware of why we support Israel. And very aware that they do not share Israel's unique political position.
It's that enough big picture stuff for you or would like to attempt to rationalize sending weapons to a genocidal regime some more?
Also a genocide is basically something where all kinds of crime are encompassed. Keeping an alliance despite genocide, maybe counterintuitively, makes one less trustworthy of an ally, because an alliance is an agreement, a contract to be held in good faith. There were obligations and agreements taken to not partake in such things, some even directly to the victims.
I'm never leaving lemmy. I love the way it's common to see normal sane views being widely accepted. I can breathe here.
This is one of those ones that sounds rational but really isn't.
Nobody said we have to leave Israel completely in the wind. They just want weapons deliveries to stop. Other countries aren't worried about Democrats holding their alliances. They're worried the Democrats are following the Republicans down the hole and supporting extreme religious parties. You show your allies you value them by listening to them, not by vetoing their anti starvation measures in the UN for several months.
It's really refreshing. We do have our share of crazies, as my block list can attest, but for the most part people are willing to accept that sometimes situations can be really complicated.
A lot of astroturfing bots though. :/
Oh?
Ohh.
What I really like about here is that nuance is understood and accepted. Very few people have a "bomb, baby, bomb!" approach. We largely agree that this violence is a tragic genocide and needs to stop. But we also understand the political reality in the US, and what our options are. And I think people have done a good job of successfully bringing Biden around on this.
Yeahhhh, about that, ...
Biden didn't invent the alliance to Israel, but when the conflict increased during his term he side-stepped congress to give weapons to them faster, so they can kill more civilians as quick as possible.
Don't excuse for what he has done. Biden is a war criminal. And having NATO, most powerful minitarly alliance in the World, threatened is no comparison to genocide in Gaza. NATO is a problem just as well, but Israel needs to be stopped ASAP.
Slaughter all genocidists and eat the rich
Biden did not invent our alliance with israel, but he certainly has strongly supported it for decades and decades: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86Nrv5izaTs
Calling the situation complicated and saying there is a lot of nuance has often been used as a cover for israel's campaign of terrorism, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and now full-speed mask-off genocide. The official US position amounts to nothing because it's two-faced. Biden will claim he is doing what he can while he bypasses congress and otherwise sneaks weapons to israel to continue the genocide. You ask about theoretical wars while downplaying a genocide happening right now. Somehow you think caring about genocide is rash, but being paranoid about imaginary wars is rational. I don't know what your intentions are, but your post sounds like a PR piece, urging us to stay calm and take things slow so that israel can complete its mission of genocide in peace.
then stop doing it instead of pretending to care ffs
They wouldn't need it as badly if someone didn't go around Congress to ban funding to UNRWA...
https://www.npr.org/2024/02/18/1232301965/the-u-s-is-barring-funding-to-unrwa-the-only-international-organization-aiding-g
And even after we found out the allegations were bullshit and confessions were after torture, both parties (except a few progressives) united to ban it till 2025.
Biden is literally responsible for this, but is acting like it's just some random thing and maybe he'll help out.
You're not entirely wrong, but Biden has bipartisan backing on this as it's part of the whole funding bill, which makes most of the repesentatives and senators complicit with Biden which this bill also gives Israel $3B, and Ukraine $0.3B.
Still, like how a massive frigate turns slowly, the actions of the State Department are showing a change of tune, and the US is nearly fed up with covering for Israel's genocide. The first steps are to abstain from ceasefire resolutions and then to give the protestors attention and credibility. There are many more steps to go.
Republicans are always gonna disrupt any real action anyway, they are full mask-off on the Christian nationalism thing and believe they must support Isreal 100% no matter what to make jesus come back.
I'd really like to believe that but the cynic in me expects that as soon as Israel gets done with their genocide campaign they'll pretend that they've turned a new leaf and all funding and military assistance will resume as though nothing had happened. There will be no lasting consequences for Israel's actions so they will, correctly, assume that there is nothing to stop them from doing it again.
Not concrete political action no, but make no mistake Israel has lost a lot of international support in this war, and support for them is now more concentrated among older people. I'll be cautiously hopeful that we'll see real change from the West in the next 20 or so years as the older generations die off and more people grow up hearing about Israel committing their second genocide.
I hope you're right.
The US is doing far more than covering for it, we are enabling it via massive funding and contributing the very bombs being used to decimate Gaza and murder 10s of thousands of civilians. Biden’s willingness to let Bibi order us around and use us as cover is absolutely pathetic - Biden, and by proxy the US, are completely captured by the far-right extremist government of a foreign nation state. This is the weakest posturing imaginable for a world leader, and it’s entirely because Biden is a genocidal Zionist freak.
“Bipartisan backing” in DC means one thing only - Congress is getting paid. It’s gross that AIPAC can buy air cover for a genocide so easily, but such is the extent of corruption in the US.
We are 6 months into this ethnic cleansing, and these baby steps are not nearly enough at this juncture. For fuck’s sake even Trump beat Biden to the natural conclusion of demanding Israel put a stop to this. The bar is so low it’s literally on the ground and Biden just faceplants in front of it. Pathetic.
"I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Martin Luther King Jr., Letter from the Birmingham Jail
You forgot banning aid to UNRWA....
Voters are, and have been.
But can you name a Dem in a party leadership position that doesn't take AIPAC money?
That's what they told FDR 80 years ago when he was trying to get universal healthcare past a Dem controlled Congress...
There's so many steps left to go, it's functionally infinite. Because Republicans take more steps back then Dems take forward.
Biden spent a billion dollars in 2020 to just barely convince voters he was better than trump. I don't know you, but if you had a billion dollar campaign, I bet you could have wiped the floor with trump.
Wait are we electing @rentlar as the Lemmy candidate? I dunno if they're eligible.
Or if someone hadn't sold Netanyahu weapons in the first place. Or if someone didn't run interference for Netanyahu at the UN.
How is Biden literally responsible for everyone uniting on that point?
He went around Congress to give billions to Israel, and to ban aid to UNRWA causing mass starvation
Then Congress included both in the budget.
Any other questions?
Any comment on the fact that donors paying for aid to UNRWA wanted this, or that it was bipartisan and - as you just pointed out - it was Congress that put it in the budget?
Why is everything all Biden's fault, when you have already said in multiple points that other people were pushing for it also?
Because he's the boss. The president is always considered the leader of their party while they're in office. That's why Truman said, "The buck stops here."
If an organization does something, the leader of that organization needs to accept responsibility or admit they're an ineffective leader.
If you have the power to unilaterally hinder a genocide and instead you use that power to enable it, you are culpable.
He's definitely culpable, but he's far from the only one.
Sure, just the one with the most ability to act on his own. His culpability is proportional to that. He's used that ability previously to aid Israel, he could use that same power to hinder them, but chooses not to.
Maybe 3 years ago he would've been, but right now, with an election coming up against Trump and his Maggats, he's in a very precarious position.
Because before it was included in the budget, Biden went around Congress to do both via executive order.
And I think the other bit is you're confused about what "donors" meant, like are you thinking it's private citizens donating money and the government now won't let them?
I'm not trying to be insulting, but from context that seems to be your impression
bullying works. if it didn't, bullies would do something else.
Amazing, they actually got him to say something after like the nth protest at his rallies after 6 months.
If we keep this up, he'll eventually talk about how he was totally gonna refund UNRWA after he loses in November.
Except he completely missed the point.
"We need to get more aid into Gaza" is very much not "we need to stop arming Israel so much."
Joe Brandon be like
Biden from today is sure saying something different:
U.S. Finds Israel in Compliance With Biden's Demands on International Law, Humanitarian Aid
posts something the Biden did not say
That's Bidens demands
No fucking shit decent human beings have a point, that could easily be taken as dismissal.
Please act, and end Israel's reign of horror.
you have a point now shut up
I'm wondering just how damageable in terms of geopolitics would a deterioration of relations with Israel be. Cause it has to be huge to justify not acting on this genocide. What stops Biden/US from acting ? what can I read to better understand this issue ?
the US sees Israel as the only thing it can control in the middle east. it was always meant to be one of a few "pro-democracy beachheads" in the area, with the US attempting to make iraq work the same way in the 2000s. The idea was to put Israel in a position where they were powerful compared to their enemies but dependent on foreign aid, so that they could do whatever they want as long as they also did whatever we want. This is straight out of the British post-colonial hegemonic playbook - you don't send people to take over, and instead you elevate one local group from second or third place to the top and then make sure they never develop enough power that they can remain on top without your help. If you do this successfully, you can control them completely because all you have to do to send them tumbling from power is nothing when they're counting on your support.
Up until now, the impact of helping Israel didn't have to be all that massive because the impact of Israeli violence against Palestinians (edit: ON THE OPINION OF THE AVERAGE AMERICAN) wasn't either. What you're seeing is a replay of the US allowing anyone with a camera to report from Vietnam - the narrative used to be pretty tightly controlled but between Palestinian social media updates and Israel's internal jingoistic propaganda being leaked to the western world it's becoming harder and harder to sustain the whole 'most moral army in the world engaged in a limited defensive operation that respects the right of all law-abiding people to live in peace' narrative. We see them shooting at people gathered around aid trucks now. We hear them talking about "children of light vs children of darkness", "every Palestinian is a terrorist because they all support Hamas" and seizing all of Palestine to build beachfront condos. Americans tend to like war in theory, but we have a strong sense of fair play and we'll only stay on board up to a certain amount of video of unarmed people being mowed down by soldiers. This is why they're simultaneously softening their position on Palestine and moving to seize the only major social media outlet that isn't US-based (and therefore isn't able to be pressured about 'misinformation' the way that FB, X, reddit, etc are). It's a matter of appeasing us in order to stay in power now while moving behind the scenes to ensure that they control the narrative in future so that they're never again put in a position where they're beholden to the will of voters who think that foreign people are people.
point one is also why the chosen rhetoric in opposition of the genocide is targeted at Netanyahu specifically rather than the entire administration, because rather than loosing relations with Israel as a country, the US wants to oust Netanyahu and have someone else they support take his place. That way they can keep their post-colonial pet in the middle east without looking like they're (still) supporting a genocide.
The problems with this, though, are:
you're absolutely right. nothing good ever happens just because it's good, and this is no different. brandon is currently trying to figure out a way to keep power in both America and the middle east, and built into the british model for post-settler-colonial hegemony is the precise lever that he's trying to pull. Namely "either you quit fucking this up for me or I'll fuck everything up for you so badly that you'll cease to exist"
Whoever buys that land to make those needs to be harassed for the rest of their lives. That's absolute scum of the earth bullshit. Religion and real estate all in one gigantic shit storm... Literally the worst humanity has to offer.
Jared Kushner I believe is the one who suggested displacing Palestinians to build luxury buildings and vacation hotspots.
So yeah, pretty much absolute scum of the earth. He can't be allowed near the White House ever again.
Thanks a bunch. Yeah that makes a lot of sense
Which was historically just a way to prolong defeat. I wonder why don't Israelis see that they are going to end up like Rhodesia, if they don't choose some other strategy of existence for themselves.
Well, they may succeed, it happens.
If it is about Israel being the one thing the US can control in the middle east, I wonder then if this is not the US realizing it is losing control of their asset.
Israel uses a significant amount of the $$ the US gives them to lobby (IOW, bribe) members of the US political parties to support them. Including giving them more $$, in a positive feedback loop. The lobbied polits in effect give themselves money along with what Israel keeps.
This is the answer. Everything else may have been more true in the past. But the lobby has become so entrenched, that this is the answer.
Alright thanks for the clarification
Are red or blue going to lose the elections? They are making money and expanding their power why should they stop?
From my understanding, we need good relations with israel to have a stable military oresence in the middle east
I see. Appreciate the clarification
It would be terrible for the West
We would have to permanently ship around the cape of Africa and abandon oil based economies
It also brings about a large issue for future wars due to strategic positioning
And allies won’t trust the US to defend them so you’re better off aligning with Russia or China
Abandoning oil based economies is good.
Yes but when so much especially militarily relies on it, there is a big transition period where you/Europe/East Asia are vulnerable and hoping that Texas is enough
I am pro nuclear but I realize the biggest problem with it is that it is a military target
Dark Brandon, come forth and high five one of them.
It's been almost six months, you could've said something before now.
You didn't watch the State of the Union speech, huh?
I’ve found the whole ‘genocide joe’ crowd very rarely listens to anything joe actually says and live off a drip feed of .ml misinfo posts
People can say whatever they want, but it's actions that matter. And his actions have generally been supportive of Israel, including going around Congress to give them aid and weapons and vetoing UN resolutions for ceasefires.
No, instead we watched his actions. Such as banning aid for the UNRWA, blocking Un resolutions against Israel, sidestepping congress to ship them weapons, ensuring billions in funding go their way.
But wow he was totally mean to them in a speech, i guess thats what matters.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Two protesters were escorted out of the Raleigh, North Carolina, venue after they cut off the president mid-remarks, shouting, "What about the health care in Gaza?"
Biden has faced numerous anti-war protests during his events in the months since the Israel-Hamas war began Oct. 7, and especially as calls have grown for his administration to take stronger action on the civilian death toll in Gaza.
In the weeks after he was interrupted about a dozen times during a January abortion rights speech, his team worked to minimize disruptions by making Biden's events smaller and withholding their precise locations longer than usual.
During his State of the Union address this month, Biden announced that he was directing the U.S. military to establish a "temporary pier in the Mediterranean on the Gaza coast" for aid delivery.
At the same time, Biden and top allies have ramped up criticism of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government's approach to the war.
Biden, who served as vice president when the ACA was passed by Congress, has made preserving access to health care a central part of his re-election bid.
The original article contains 509 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!