The Biden administration has told key lawmakers it is sending a new package of more than $1 billion in arms and ammunition to Israel, three congressional aides said Tuesday.

It’s the first arms shipment to Israel to be announced by the administration since it put another arms transfer — consisting of 3,500 bombs — on hold this month. The administration has said it paused that earlier transfer to keep Israel from using the bombs in its growing offensive in the crowded southern Gaza city of Rafah.

      • Flying SquidM
        link
        English
        56 months ago

        Please do not respond to multiple comments with the same post. That is essentially spamming, no matter how well-intentioned you are.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Why should we believe that a more equitable voting system would solve this issue? Or any similar issues?

        To be sure, ranked choice voting would result in some improvements to the United States, and should be supported on that basis. But it would do nothing to modify the current structure wherein oligarchs rule the United States with impunity. It’s just that this would empower the neoliberal Democratic oligarchs rather than the fascist Republican oligarchs. Which is harm reduction and is therefore preferable, but is not a meaningful solution - especially to something as entrenched as Zionism

        • @venusaur
          link
          English
          46 months ago

          We would have to dismantle capitalism entirely and a huge cultural shift to fix that. Huge spending caps on campaigns would be a good start.

          RCV allows people to vote for candidates of a third party without wasting a vote like they would now. The problem is that much of society is brainwashed with red vs. blue politics and it would take a long time for everybody to get on the same page about a third party candidate.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            46 months ago

            I agree.

            And, again, RCV and campaign finance reform would certainly be an improvement.

            But the root issue would remain untouched. And eventually, the ruling class would find ways to grossly manipulate that system to their own ends as well - or would gradually chip away at it through the judiciary that they control

            These proposals should be adopted nevertheless. But we should be clear-eyed about what they will and will not accomplish

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Because the electoral and voting systems in the US are, respectively, intentionally undemocratic and extremely inconsistent depending on the state.

          RCV for national elections would materially address the former, and enforcing RCV as the system to use for all elections at all levels would materially address the latter.

          I am not claiming RCV (or any other similar/related system) would be a panacea, but it would be a damn sight better than the intentionally flawed shitshow we have to use now.

      • @flames5123
        link
        English
        16 months ago

        STAR voting is so much better than RCV. RCV is only marginally better than first past the post.

        • @venusaur
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          is it just RCV with 5 rankings, or you rank every candidate?

          • @flames5123
            link
            English
            16 months ago

            You can rank every candidate, so you can give multiple people 5’s. If you can’t decide between them. In RCV, if 51% vote #1 for candidate A, 49% vote #1 for candidate B, but 100% vote #2 for candidate C, the winner is still candidate A even though everyone voted for C. Everyone would’ve been a little satisfied. In STAR, if everyone put 4’s for C, they would win.

            • @venusaur
              link
              English
              16 months ago

              Most people would still give A and B 5’s or 4’s, so C still loses even if they get all 4’s, no?

              • @flames5123
                link
                English
                16 months ago

                You total all of the points. So say 100 people with the 51/49 doing A/B at 5, and all 100 do C at 4. A would have 255 points, B would have 245 points, and C would have 400. C wins by a landslide.

                • @venusaur
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Ah right assuming A and B are opposing candidates. Kind of a way to eliminate the most popular opposing candidates in a runoff assuming there is a middle of the road candidate that everybody likes.

                  In RCV this might be translated differently tho. Maybe 26% vote C #1, 49% A #1, 25% B #1 with C #2, then in runoff, C would win.

                  I don’t see everybody liking the same candidate for #2.

                  • @flames5123
                    link
                    English
                    16 months ago

                    It’s more of an example how a more popular candidate can lose because RCV still depends on first past the post and isn’t that much better. It’s not translated by points. Everyone gets #1 first. If anyone has 51%, they win and we’re done. If no one has 51%, then we eliminate the least popular candidate, transferring the votes. This continues until one is at 51%. RCV is a bandaid.

                    Check out this CGP Grey video about RCV: https://youtu.be/3Y3jE3B8HsE

    • andrew
      link
      fedilink
      English
      86 months ago

      Nonsense! We will write that history so that we’re clearly the good guys!

      Unless you’re saying it’s possible we’ve not always been the good guys but surely that’s not it.

    • @retrospectology
      link
      English
      66 months ago

      Which is why so many people simply cannot put their name in support of Biden and AIPAC democrats.

      There’s pragmatic politics and then there’s supporting actual genocide. For many people that line is something they just won’t ever compromise on because it’s so unequivocally immoral, there’s no justification to actively support it.

      Personally if he doesn’t reverse course there’s no way I’m voting for this. I’ve lived through one Trump presidency, I’ll do it again if I have to and find other ways to resist.

      If Democrats can’t do better than genocide they can’t demand my vote.

      • @jumjummy
        link
        English
        06 months ago

        What a completely foolish take. “I won’t vote for Biden, I’ll just vote for the guy who wants to be a dictator and who cares even less about Palestine”

        Russian troll or a completely deluded and/or privileged person who “lived through one Trump presidency”.

        I can’t begin to stress how completely, off the rails, crayon eating levels of stupidity this approach is.

        • @retrospectology
          link
          English
          16 months ago

          Who said I was voting for Trump?

          Biden can easily get my vote, there’s literally only one thing he has to do; stop supporting genocide. It’s not rocket science. Don’t like the idea of him losing? Then you need to be doing everything in your power to communicate to him that he needs to do a 180 on this issue. People aren’t going to vote for him because you try to badger and shame them, didn’t work in 2016, won’t work now.

          • @jumjummy
            link
            English
            16 months ago

            Sadly with how the US general election works, if your not voting for Biden, it just helps Trump. You know his supporters don’t care about Israel, the Middle East, women, LGBT people, etc., so they’re not holding back.

            If Trump wins, none of your rhetoric will excuse where we end up, and yes Biden and the current lobbying groups so entrenched with Israel have their share of the blame, but absolutely so do the voters who let it happen.

      • @Ellecram
        link
        English
        -26 months ago

        Not a genocide. It’s war.

        • @retrospectology
          link
          English
          06 months ago

          No. It is a genocide.

          Even Netanyahu admitted it was analagous to the genocide of the Amakelites in the Torah fairy tale.

          There is no debate here, it is a genocide and you are a supporter.

        • @retrospectology
          link
          English
          4
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          No, who said that? Voting uncommitted is a valid third option when Democrats don’t give you someone you can morally vote for.

    • @Mango
      link
      English
      36 months ago

      Well, so far as the decision makers are concerned, the lesson is that we always win. It’s just unfortunate that what’s important doesn’t matter to them and they do not represent us.