572
US ambassador to Israel says US no longer pursuing goal of independent Palestinian state
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
572 points (100.0% liked)
World News
47628 readers
2219 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The original comment is a shitty take. Biden was sending billions in weapons to israel to carry out its mission of genocide. He continued doing this even though people were begging him to stop during an election when he needed their votes. Harris continued his rhetoric. You and Chainweasel think that somehow Biden/Harris would have changed course after they didn't need the votes. Now you're talking about people jerking all over themselves while you and Chainweasel admonish voters for not picking the correct genocide-enabler-in-chief. Hope you have good balance on that pedestal of yours because it's really high up.
You got worse than what you were protesting. Good job. Huge success!
Congrats to the democrats for prioritizing genocide over beating trump, I guess.
the fact I made this months ago and people like you are still proving it relevant is hilarious, though I suppose the second panel should be "third party/not at all/for trump" in this context
"but one of them will explicitly make it worse"
Biden was making it worse for over a fucking year. Your comic is not clever or informative or even truthful, sorry. I voted for Harris, but I cannot control how others vote. If democrats want votes, they should actually try to get them. Democrats running on "other guy will make it worstester!!!!" while still making things worse themselves is a losing strategy and yet here you are defending it. That's truly a stick-in-spokes maneuver.
the contentious point has never been that democrats should have run a better campaign. on that we all agree. the relevant issue has always been that not voting democrat would result in a worse outcome.
surprise surprise. it did.
Democrats being better than republicans wasn't a contentious point either, it's the lowest bar to clear. The problem is how do we get democrats in office? Clearly, democrats doing the bare minimum and then shaming voters is not working. Telling voters that one pile of shit is better than another is meaningless to the average voter when they're eating shit regardless.
it would work if the average American wasn't such a weak minded ignoramus incapable of seeing the greater good, voting for their self interests or remembering further than the last month of their pathetic existence.
Worse than Trump? No.
Can we raise the bar higher than the ground, please?
Evidently not, since some voters thought (and still think!) that the solution was to elect Trump. That's evidently where the bar is, as determined by the voters.
In their defense, it's very expected that some people can be so stupid as to think Trump was not going to be worse for Gaza. And Ukraine. And Europe. And US. But I guess you are.
That's why they can you "useful idiot"
Edit: to be clear, I don't mean "you" in particular, but those like you in general.
It's obvious that you're calling me stupid and an idiot. You assign behaviors that you think apply to me and then say that those behaviors make one a useful idiot. I know you're just trying to skirt rule 5, but this has got to be one of the most pathetic attempts I've seen.
Why am I skirting any rule? Those like you include you. I've even said explicitly on your quote.
You were fooled and you're trying to defend it as some form of moral superiority. You don't care about Gaza, you care more about not admitting you were wrong.
Go ahead and report me, just be careful to not fall from your high horse.
I've reported you, but not "you" in particular, but those like you in general
Which app are you using? The official one only let's you report one person at a time, I don't see "all those not fooled by fascist in general" as an option.
Oh you have to get the other app, the one that lets you invent functionality as you go. Ineffective, but liberating
All this time Kang was the right choice! Down with Kronos!!!
Child.
You understand what you already know, and nothing more
Ok, so assume all things equal, everything happens the same in Gaza... Trump is still significantly worse in every other facet. So yea, all third party voters and non voters are fucking moronic Trump supporters. A bunch of ignorant fuckwits that think that they made a difference by standing up against the establishment. Congrats, we got Trump.
There's only so many ways to say that there were two outcomes last November, and everyone knew that. If y'all can't wrap your head around that reality 6 months later, then that says everything about your ability to reason.
Why I don't get is why the democrats ran a chicken race with democracy for a widely despised policy when they knew the stakes. We can call the electorate morons all day and even have point, but they are supposed to be smart.
The why doesn't strike me as hard. A number of domestic voting blocks in critical swing states will mobilize hard against any perceived flagging of support of Israel. It will play poorly in the press broadly, and opponents will successfully fundraise on the issue.
The worst part is the party is being entirely realistic. Jeremy Corbyn showed what happens when a party leadership is not sufficiently supportive of Israel. Any left of center leader will be tagged as radical, but the accusations of harboring antisemitic elements lost labour what should have been a landslide victory.
Continuing to write Israel a blank check may be widely despised, but the left might hold their nose and vote blue anyway. The left is famously never satisfied, so what else is new?
Even when Bidens line was far to the right of every previous admin besides Donalds? I have a hard time believing there wasn't a coalition holding line possible here when it was a majority possition.
that’s absolutely true too! there are multiple parties who share the responsibility… as always, the world is complex and rarely are things black and white
The most basic job responsibility of a politician is to get elected. Democrats' only platform is "at least we're not as bad as the other guys" but the other guys only get worse and worse while democrats follow along, making sure to be just different enough to make people think they have a choice, but not different enough to change the course of our country and its servitude to the ultra-rich.
You're arguing with people on here who most likely voted for Harris. I know I did. However, who I vote for doesn't matter when democrats are so bad at looking appealing and fighting for a winning chance that my vote is drowned out by others not paying attention or who are gerrymandered away (or otherwise suppressed).
I'm specifically arguing with/against non voters, 3rd party voters, and Trump voters. I also pinched my nose and voted for Harris in November. I'm not going to argue for the democratic party, because it's the second worst major party in the US, and they suck. Unfortunately, we are a FPtP nation, so in the general we get two options and get to pick who's less bad. Lot's of people that voted for Harris did so with that in mind.
Doesn't matter what the Democrats platform was.
If they were concerned about Gaza and didn't vote Harris, then they didn't care about Gaza. Because of them Trump got elected like everyone told them, and made the situation in Gaza worse.
If democrats were concerned about stopping trump and ignored voters, then they didn't care about stopping trump. Because of them trump got elected like everyone told them, and made the situation in Gaza worse.
The main argument was never "Trump is no worse than Harris". To argue against this is fighting windmills.
The argument has always been, of the two candidates, one of which will win, which is less bad? People that voted third party or didn't vote decided that Trump is less bad.
No it wasn't. That's disregarding a heap of systemic criticism and historical and moral considerations.
It was, because that's reality. It does disregard a lot of criticism, because again, at the end of the day, there were two candidates, and one was going to win. Harris wasn't, imo, a good candidate, but Trump was a far worse.
In the US, it's been that way for the better part of the past century, because FPtP always devolves to a two party system. This past election was no different.
1 million upvotes for you. "Hope you're happy Trump got elected. Palestine is doing great now" etc. is such a tired cliche at this point. I'm astonished that it gets upvoted every. single. time. Harris literally said she wouldn't do anything different from Biden. She would have allowed/financed the genocide all the same, but she'd be calling the "tragic loss of life" a "very complex issue." I have no idea where this fantasy comes from that she would suddenly be the hero who stands up to Israel.
She would have been better for the world as a whole than Trump. If you truely think that things would have played out exactly the same in Gaza with Harris as POTUS, then it still comes down to two candidates last November, and every person knew that one of them would win. So a vote for Trump, a non vote, or a third party vote directly benefited Trump.
"Oh but I voted against genocide", fuck no you didn't. You voted in a manner that directly put Trump in charge, which was the worst possible outcome.
To be clear, I voted for Harris, and I implored everyone I know to vote for Harris, for exactly the reasons you mentioned. I will always vote for the farthest-left candidate in the general, full-stop. I'm not arguing that both sides are the same, or that Harris wouldn't have been a better choice for 100 reasons outside of the genocide issue. I'm arguing that Harris gave no indication that she would defend Palestine or even recognize the genocide at all. She might well have done those things, but she didn't campaign on that, so I don't know why anyone is defending her on the issue. Establishment Dems can't seem to get it through their heads that progressive policies are popular, so we keep getting general elections between an absolute monster and a neolib Dem saying, "Vote for me or you'll get the monster!" That might be the reality, but it's not a platform.
I live in a blue state, and I had people around me arguing that whether they voted third-party or didn't vote at all, they would be able to sleep at night knowing that A. they didn't vote for genocide and B. the state would go blue anyway. I don't agree with that position at all. I want third parties to be represented in the US, but that starts at the local level and in the primaries. By the general election it's too late and we realistically have two options. I also believe that shutting down any criticism of the Dem candidate (e.g. a now-banned user told me to kill myself) is a good way to alienate people and discourage them from engaging with the process at all. The right has banned nuance from their discourse, and I refuse to allow the same thing to happen around me.
I agree with you on everything you wrote.
I'm not trying to say that Harris would have been good for Palestine, or even a good POTUS. I'm saying she was the less bad option overall in the election. I don't know that anything would be different with Israel had she won, but I think there was a better chance that she would have done something good over Trump doing something good. That could still be a negligible chance, but it was the better of two chances.
Like you said, local elections and primaries (when they're held, but that's separate from this overall conversation) are when to vote for different parties and more fringe candidates. One of two people is already the winner in the election by the time November rolls around, so it comes down to least bad.
It could be argued that trump is actually better for the world (but not for the US) since he's ruining the US's soft power by tearing up alliances and expressing blatant corruption, making the US look incompetent and completely untrustworthy. Now other countries are finding alternatives, making the US not as central as it used to be. He is perhaps the most effective tool in helping the US empire fall.
You could also argue that this is accelerationism, but to be fair, democrats take advantage of accelerationism all the time (e.g. "republicans have repealed reproductive rights, donate even more money to us so we can fight it" while letting things get worse and worse, barely putting up a fight to make long-lasting changes and indeed letting things get this bad so they can position themselves as the only "solution").
All, unfortunately, true.
Edit: Unfortunate for us in the US, not necessarily unfortunate for the rest of the world in some aspects. I still think as a whole his influence and other actions probably still make him worse for the world, but there is a valid argument about nations growing less dependent on the US.
Hopefully in 3.5 years (or please God, less), the US will be knocked down a peg on the world stage, other nations have a more diverse and stable trade relationships, and maybe Trump's actions will help spark other countries into action against hard right politics to prevent the same thing from happening to them. Ideally, this could be a catalyst for positive change, but I'm not holding my breath.
Most wars of the last 100 years are heavily influenced by American decisions. Who they elected as president is not domestic policy, it directly influences the amount of missiles that will be raining on your friends.
It's the difference between "let's build a symbolic pier do deliver two cartons of milk" and "let's exterminate them so we can build a hotel".
Most wars of the last 100 years are heavily influenced by American decisions. Who they elected as president is not domestic policy, it directly influences the amount of missiles that will be raining on your friends.
It's the difference between "let's build a symbolic pier do deliver two cartons of milk" and "let's exterminate them so we can build a hotel".