politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
C'mon don't kid. This is a footnote in history and will be remembered as little more than a local police matter. A war with Iran on the other hand, is going to kill 35,000 people by the hour, by the minute perhaps. Imagine how sad that's going to be for you!
That's the starfish I'm thinking about. Not you though. You have the one right in front of you that you're talking about saving on the internet, not actually saving, and can't see there is actually a starfish steamroller coming down the beach and the starfish you are tying to save are the ones that invited the steamroller to come.
So, in your opinion, this is all okay because the alternative is war with Iran?
Why are you so sure that will happen if Palestine and Hamas survive? Are you concerned that it might be bias giving you so much confidence?
I have to say that it appears like you are just imagining a worse outcome (whether likely or not) and using it to justify a slightly less bad outcome.
Seems like shaky ground, no?
I suppose if you think of it as some far off thing that might happen, yeah pretty shaky. Being a long term state sponsor of anti Jewish terrorism shows their commitment to wiping out Israel. It's basically also all the talk about. They are true believers: they think they are ordained by God to control all Israeli land, that Jews should be removed from such lands by force, that when they find terrorism aimed at killing innocent Israeli people, that they are doing God's work. In short, the war is already happening. It's about keeping it contained.
I'm not even as concerned with the direct, hot war. Israel will wipe Iranian forced off the map within weeks, and they will certainly turn Tehran into a sheet of glass before they let Iranian troops march into Jerusalem.
I'm thinking about the 110,000,000 people that live in Iran and Israel, as well as the hundreds of millions of other people who live in surrounded states that are likely to collapse under the weight of the unprecedented refugee crisis which would result from another failed middle east state as large as Iran. And after Israel gets done defending itself, Iran will be a failed state.
Try to imagine one state after another throughout the Mediterranean Coast, throughout North Africa, down the eastern coast of Africa, South and central Asia. A lot of these countries are barely hanging on, how's it going to be when they're wave after wave of millions of refugees who all need food and water. 35,000 people could be dying every 8 minutes.
Yeah, maybe this a little bit speculative in the same way anything that hasn't happened yet is a little bit speculative.
I think we take a little bit of precaution to try and avoid this, and that means we bolster Israel's defensive posture as to Iran. And I don't see how anyone could really get upset about that. Israel does not need anyone to bolster their defensive posture as far as Gaza or the West Bank is concerned. Do they make their own weapons in Israel. They do not need one us-made weapon to level all of Gaza and all of the West Bank. And they could do it within a day. The fact that not only have they not done so, they have managed to only kill 0.7% of the people in these areas over the course of 8 months. That's why they have the right to claim they are the most moral Army in the world; any other country's military would have leveled the place after about the third suicide bombing.
Like I get it, 35,000 people, half of them kids, it is awful. No, it is not okay. Israel can and must do more to limit civilian casualties. But it's morally, practically, legally, emphatically less not okay than purposely weakening Israel's posture as to Iran, to invite that catastrophe, because we got really sad about wildly exaggerated reports about how Israel is handling a local border dispute with a group of outlaws and their loyal supporters. Again, I know not all Palestinians are loyal Hamas supporters. It's probably a hell of lot more than 0.7%, though.
That is a hell of a lot of conjecture.
I don’t know that Israel would win that one though, they couldn’t even stop a probing attack from Iran, and that was with the help of4-5 other countries as well as advance notice.
Iran could glass Tel Aviv tomorrow if they actually wanted to and Israel wouldn’t be able to stop it.
Maybe if we find some kids throwing rocks or some hostages with their hands up, or hell even some people just sleeping.
Now those I bet the cowardly little fucks could handle, anything more dangerous than that though, they are ok with killing 50 to 100 people to get1 supposed Hamas person.
Maybe we can find them some clearly marked aid workers or journalists.
Don’t try to sell me a piece of shit and pretend it’s candy.
You seem to be clueless as to military posture between Iran and Israel, and Iran doesn't have any nuclear weapons.
The best they can hope for is to smuggle a dirty bomb into Israel through the tunnels in Gaza.
There's actually not a lot of speculation about this. It's pretty much uncontroversial consensus of the American government, that's why support for Israeli has so much bipartisan support.
It's pretty much not if but when, and there are top generals saying it could be as early as next year, just like Russia was telegraphing its invasion of Ukraine for years ahead of time. It was speculative to suggest in 2014 that Russia was planning to invade Ukraine, but plenty of people were saying that. American intelligence is not stupid. As the world's only superpower, it is our job to make these predictions for the good of the hundreds of millions of people that I am talking about being in harm's way.
Iran gearing up right now.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/hezbollahs-hassan-nasrallah-warns-israel-of-surprises-as-gaza-conflict-keeps-raging-5747318
https://www.voanews.com/a/iran-s-enriched-uranium-stockpile-grows-iaea-reports/7628904.html
https://www.reuters.com/world/swedish-security-service-says-iran-uses-criminal-networks-sweden-2024-05-30/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/tehran-supplied-yemens-houthis-with-sea-launched-ballistic-missile-iranian-media/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-downs-2-drones-targeting-eilat-in-attack-claimed-by-iran-backed-iraqi-militia/
https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2024/05/25/mounting-hezbollah-drone-attacks-raises-alarm-in-northern-israel/
Doesn't seem very speculative.
They had US,UK, French, and I want to say Jordanian and Saudi help.
Iran picked the right amount to make their point since they knew the Israelis had defenses.
What do you think would have happened if they had wanted to do anything other than make their point?
You’re sending me links that say Iran might have nukes, I would say they probably already do.
Tel Aviv would be gone and Israel just isn’t strong enough to counter that.
Yeah Iran made their point last month and no more. They tried to make their point a few years ago too you will recall and the only thing that stopped them was that they accidentally shot down their own civilian airliner. I'm not particularly worried about Iran taking measured and proportionate responses. Israel knew Iran was going to retaliate when it popped their general. The problem is nobody knew if Iran was going to launch a full air assault with bombers and fighters or how long they will tolerate losses before they give up.
None of these links say Iran might have nukes. They say they have enriched uranium. They do not have a weapon to deliver a nuclear warhead. Nobody who knows anything about this thinks that they already do. Maybe they have a dirty bomb, which, like, shitty, but who cares, any quasi state actor can throw a dirty bomb together.
Listen, Iran is not a serious threat to Israel's continued existence. The problem is that any significant offensive moves by Iran will result in its collapse not long after, and Iran doesn't realize that, because they are insane dumbasses who think they are literally chosen by Dog as supreme and rightful heirs to all of the middle east.
They know just on paper they can't win a war with Israel, just like Hamas knows that. But they disregard what they know because they think their cause is divine. A strong Israeli posture as to Iran keeps Iran from getting too far up their own ass that they actually shoot their shot. This is not an imaginary dilemma. This is what they're talking about at West Point, at UNGA, at G7 summits and I'm at least twenty five years the conversation has not changed much. This is the calculus. If you look at the situation in Gaza and think this is so unbelievable how can this be, I'm giving you the calculus right here. You can't understand why Joe Biden isn't setting himself on fire in front of the White House, this is why.
The sine quo non is Iran being dumb fucks that the West cannot turn its back to. The collapse of Iran would cause a humanitarian catastrophe unlike anything that the world has ever seen.
Why would you choose the killing civilians option rather than just saying they each need their own country? Israel needs to hold new elections, and Hamas will not be permitted to rule Palestine.
I understand the vitriol towards Hamas but I dont understand why all Palestinians are grouped in with Hamas.
If I were to follow that perspective, wouldnt I have to condemn all Israelis for the actions of their political leaders?
If you are going to hold your breath waiting for Gaza to excise Hamas, you're going to suffocate.
They won't do it. They have had chance after chance after chance. Even now, it would only take a few cooperators to dismantle whatever is left of Hamas and the tunnels. Where is the cooperation? Where t the effort by Palestinian people to thwart Hamas's terro le strategy? I don't see it.
I used to agree with a two state solution even for Gaza and still could be easily persuaded as to the West Bank, but Gaza is forfeit, it's a lost cause, it is irredenta. a few bad apples spoiled the bunch. Everything is corrupted, from its institutions to very foundations of its cities.
Terrorists are in charge of Gaza. Here are some things terrorists are not allowed to have: a country, an international airport, a deep water port, access to global banking. The reasons are obvious. Those are some of things Gaza has forfeited by putting terrorists in charge and keeping them there.
Regardless of who's in charge of Gaza, the Palestinian people need somewhere to live.
Would you say the best option is to allow israel to clear out all of Gaza and the give it back to the Palestinian people? What about expanding the West Bank to accommodate the displaced people?
To me it sounds like the "genocide" option, or however you want to call it, is just the easy option. It requires the least amount of effort, as a huge amount of people no longer need to be respected, considered, or protected. The right thing to do would require compromise between the two nations, which can't happen when one nation won't admit the other exists.
Not to mention that Israel "moved in" to their current country not that long ago, you'd think they'd have compassion for a people who is oppressed greatly and hsd no safe place to call their own.
The one true thing about all people is how resilient and adaptable we are. It takes energy and effort to continue living a certain perspective, and if we put that energy into a different perspective as individuals and as a community (perspectives are infectious), it just takes time to change.
If you really think people can't change then I could see why you would think what's happening now is an alright solution.