1454
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
1454 points (100.0% liked)
News
29507 readers
1797 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
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
Bernie on the right side of history as usual.
Also just a little slow to come around to reality like always.
Edit... Down vote all you want I'm still a big Bernie fan but the whole US government has been on the wrong side of this war from the beginning. We treat Palestinian lives just like black and brown lives at home like they didn't matter.
Lastly Hamas is not Palestinian I can support Palestinians and condemn Hamas.
He was criticizing the response since the beginning?
Frankly I was initially supporting them, as I am against Hamas but Israel lost the objective, didn't destroy Hamas and didn't get hostages out. So what was all that for?
Gaining more land, that is what it was for.
And so Netanyahu can avoid criminal prosecution.
Must be new to the long history of apartheid, genocidal, capitalist project that is "Israel"..
Zionists will only stop when they eradicate all Palestinians, because they believe they have a god-given right to be there. For them this is business as usual.
this guy has been saying this literally since the beginning
Incorrect, Sanders has been a Zionist for his career, it's been his one split with the american left wing.
what you said, even if were to be true, does not contradict what I said so your comment does not make any sense
You don't know what you're talking about
And doing so in a way that is going to accomplish almost nothing while antagonizing and alienating the people who would let him otherwise get positive legislature passed.
He’s a fucking legend.
It's easy to rage against the machine on a moral pedestal. It's harder to actually steer the machine in the right direction.
To be clear, I am supportive of putting things to a vote even if there's no chance it succeeds. Get the votes on record. I think that's an important archive that can be used later in election season to hold politicians accountable for their votes.
I like what Bernie and AOC are doing when they push for these kinds of votes.
But make no mistake. They can only do this from a position of being unable to effect any change. Under normal conditions, moves like this poison the well and make others on both sides less willing to work with you.
They have the luxury of grandstanding specifically because they have zero hope of garnering support.
Someone like a president can't really do something like this without completely burning their political capital.
If only we had a president who is never going to hold office again and has nothing to lose right now... Damn our current pres is nothing like that
You realize his actions have a direct impact on Harris' campaign... right?
You realise Biden's current stance on Israel is unpopular by a vast majority of the Democratic voter base, right?
I couldn't find much, but this poll seems to suggest the majority supports the US position on Israel. It's surprisingly bipartisan.
Do you have another source maybe? This poll is from June, maybe you found something more recent?
But what if Trump and pals manage to stabilize their fascist state. You will never have another free election (Putin style instead of the propaganda of billionaires and theocrats). The whole world will be fucked and all on your coin toss.
It is for once too dangerous to leave to chance. You need to get Harris in, and Trump and the corrupt supreme justices in jail. THEN from the ground up build a new political party for the people and the planet.
Worked out really great in 2016, didn't it? Absolutely brainless take with no basis in reality.
I kinda remember this pandemic response team we used to have... Good thing we didn't and currently still don't have an ongoing pandemic killing people worldwide!
People resisted and got a corrupt Supreme Court, dismantled consumer, environmental, worker, and abortion protections, an attempted coup, and somehow we all treat Covid like it wasn't fucking Trump's fault.
Shut the actual fuck up, you accelerationist piece of shit. Congratulations on your willingness to sacrifice people who didn't agree to be sacrificed, I'd rather keep more people alive, Anerica and the world got pretty fucked by Trump.
I'm sorry, you're an accelerationist, this civil war bullshit has been a conservative fantasy for a long time now.
and it's just as idiotic for someone on the left to call for it as it is evil intentions on the right, we have seen this over and over and over again, hell it's part of why every mass murdering movement of fascists and authoritarians came to be in the 20th century, the fucking holocaust literally could not have happened without people like you in the German political sphere
accept it's not.
It's a poll about the US role in the ME w.r.t. Israel, the rest of the poll's questions were also about Israel, this was just the question that I figured best represents how people feel about Biden's handling of it so far.
Are you sure about that? Last time Trump was president we got Russia gearing up for an invasion of Ukraine and China posturing regarding an invasion of Taiwan as well. Neither of these conflicts have been or would be beneficial to humanity as a whole. It's destroyed the ecosystem in Ukraine for example.
And suppose Trump does turn isolationist instead of going to war with Iran like he's been trying to do. Do you think the resulting power vacuum will lead American voters to believe that going isolationist was beneficial? We saw the opposite in 2020 happen, where people wanted the US to return to the world stage by electing Biden.
Have you considered that you might end up on the losing side? Republicans have always been war hawks. Them fully cementing their power through Trump could very well lead to an even more active US war machine. Trump won't be around forever, he's old and these days the target of assassination attempts.
Accelerationism has been tried in the past. It has never ended well. I urge you to really reflect on what it truly means if your envisioned scenario were to happen. I urge you to reflect on the many, many things that have to happen in order to end up somewhere better. And please, consider what happens if you're wrong about what electing Trump will lead to.
I live in a country that's been under the yolk of another whose population thought like you do, that maybe making things worse will make things better. It led to the worst environmental disaster we've ever known, caused the deaths of millions and led to the birth of the US war machine. The scars are still visible today.
I sympathize with you though. The US is in a shit place electorally speaking. Organizing for electoral reform is probably the best shot at fixing things, but that takes incredible time, effort and money to get through. I can see why that feels hopeless. But personally, I find it a more honorable cause. Endangering yourself and many others is in my opinion deeply irresponsible.
I see some contradictory statements here, perhaps you could clarify those for me.
You believe the Democrats to be unwilling to improve on social matters, be it both domestic and foreign, correct? They may state that they hold these beliefs, but you don't expect them to make a meaningful change, which is why you don't see a path to improvement under Harris. I hope I understood you correctly here.
At the same time however, you seem to believe that electing Trump will lead to a civil war. Who exactly do you expect to start said civil war here? It won't be Trump as he's already in power, and it won't be the Democrats either because they don't genuinely believe in liberty/democracy. If they won't even vote for it, how can you expect them to fight for it? I'd argue electing Trump reduces the chance of a civil war, even according to your own logic. And even if a group other than the Democrats were to take up arms, that group would certainly be smaller than a Trump-led government backed by the US army. Trump would win in that case, and any hopes of progress would be dashed completely.
Any side with a shot at winning a civil war would have to be either the Democrats or the Republicans. Since the Democrats wouldn't start a civil war (too spineless), the Republicans have to. And I'd posit to you that the only way they would do so is if Trump loses the election and contests it, riling up his base. We know that his base is radical enough for it (see Jan 6), and Trump is too much of a narcissist to refuse the chance. In this scenario, Biden/Harris would have to use the army to put down the insurrection, and the political momentum from that might give people a shot at improving things in the way you want. Arguably there's historical precedent for this, with Lincoln having the momentum to ban slavery during the civil war.
You also seem to, and I quote "believe in the American people". But that same people makes up the US army, makes up and and supports both political parties and also seems entirely complacent to keep voting for the same two sets of douchebags and not push for electoral reform in any meaningful way. In fact, you don't even seem to think that the Democrats could be pressured into change, not even on the matter of Palestine. Either the Democrats are unwilling to change a position in exchange for power, or said pressure isn't as big as you seem to think it is, and most Americans just don't care enough (which would also put a pretty big dent in the whole "civil war"-plan.
Frankly, it seems to me that the accelerationist civil war strategy makes more sense when you elect Harris. But I'm not sure if it's worth pursuing at all, since I can't think of any historical precedent where this has worked out.
That poll isn't about any specific policy
Polls:
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Nice finds!
Yes and Harris complicity in continuing the genocide in Gaza, the ethnic cleansing in the Westbank and now the invasion of Lebanon will be the greatest risk for her election. But they would rather hand over the US to Trump on a silver plate, than to stop killing Arabs.
I think Russian propaganda will be the greatest threat to her campaign, actually
Well, he was also a part of blocking the military aid to Ukraine for all those months. But this one is good
That was also good. America is not the world police.
Hot take: Global geopolitics within the current rules as we understand it don't allow for countries to genuinely respect each other as equals. Might will always be right on the global stage regardless of whether it should be that way. So when it comes to picking a global hegemon, the United States is really not a terrible choice compared with the alternatives.
We are also a part of nato.
Ukraine is not, objectively could not qualify before 2014 when it became good for the US war machine for them to qualify, and most importantly, NATO should've disbanded in 1991 when the sole reason for its existence fell.
Yeah, our country is shitty. I get the main reason the US joined the allies had more to do with politics then ideology. But least some kind of good comes from the US backing ukraine.
Russia still exists so what are you on about?
The soviet union doesn't, but the power was always concentrated into Russia, and guess what, Russia wants their territory back now. The countries which existed under the USSR and never want Russian rule again? Russia sees them as rightfully theirs. I for one am glad to have NATO protection. And I'm glad something is being done to help our brothers in Ukraine, because they weren't as lucky as we were, to join the EU and NATO.
Putin is running out of money.
Just thought you should be aware.
Don't you mean left(ish)?
Yugoslavia certainly doesn't think so.
Interesting, care to explain?
I was curious as well, so I looked it up. Apparently he grudgingly supported the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999, despite firmly opposing a similar action taken in 1995 with Croatia. He called the bombing borderline unconstitutional, but added that such an operation seemed necessary to prevent an ethnic cleansing.
Not sure I would agree with the previous commenter since Yugoslavia doesn't exist any more, so I doubt that a no longer in existence country has strong feelings about anything. I also believe the people would likely not want to reform a country that was created for them, especially since their actions in 1999 led to the country dissolving into two or three countries.
the intervention in the Yugoslavian war in 1999 was the only moral answer. it's like the trolley problem if the 5 people are replaced with several entire ethnic groups