You want to believe that the IDF is held back by lack of personnel, but they’re not. They are not being held back from anything they want to do. Putting US soldiers in Gaza does not add to their capacity to continue the genocide exactly as they wish.
Zionists keep trying to convince everyone that Trump would be worse on this, which is simply a way of refusing to accept the reality of just how bad it really is.
You’re not understanding what I was saying (or you’re continuing to try to intentionally misrepresent what I was saying).
Using your analogy, you’re the one saying 6 million deaths is acceptable as long as it doesn’t get to six million and one. You’re trying to simultaneously say we need to accept mass slaughter to avoid mass slaughter, it’s nonsense.
The “six million deaths” are happening in Gaza right now. They are actually suffering and dying, but you’re telling us we should accept that since you’re afraid of not being able to kick the political can down the road and kerp pretending everything can be fine.
It doesn’t matter, I can’t make you understand why rewarding the Democrats for genocidal fascist policy is a losing strategy when they’re suppose to be the alternative to genocidal fascists. You either let yourself understand it or you don’t.
This is exactly why Netanyahu is doing what he is doing. He wants Trump. He knows the US doesn’t/can’t lose an ally in the region and he forces the administrations hand, which makes them look bad to their supporters. Those supporters stop supporting… and then Trump gets elected.
Don’t let Netanyahu play you. Don’t fall into his trap. Vote in local elections for people opposed to the genocide. Reach out to them and express it is a huge, maybe the only, concern of yours. That is how you bring change.
Removing yourself from the conversation doesn’t make the problem go away.
There are millions that just don’t vote. Never have, never will. So their stance has no impact. It is worse to be willing to use that vote and then throw it away on a single issue that won’t change, no matter the candidate (and honestly in this case one candidate there is a chance vs one where there is zero chance for Gaza and things get worse for Ukraine).
We’ve effectively been given the Trolley Problem and, instead of playing, you’re choosing to walk away and whatever happens, happens, as long as you feel good.
It can be endorsing, yes. There’s a reason so many democrats are not attending – going to Netanyahu’s speech lends him legitimacy and a greater perception of support.
World politics is about negotiation.
Stopping the genocide doesn’t require negotiation, you withhold aid until they stop.
But as I keep saying, Harris will need to find way to signal that her meeting isn’t in support of Netanyahu. If she goes in and is giving him hugs and holding his hand up in unity and that kind of bullshit, that’s a really bad sign. It can go either way, I’m just stating that I won’t support genocide just because it gets a fresh face on it, Harris needs to prove her commitment to holding Netanyahu to account in a real, material way.
Anything but voting for Harris would be supporting Trump, an even worse pro-genocide candidate. You can’t equate Harris, who’s calling for a ceasefire, with Trump, who gave Israel Jerusalem and is telling Israel to keep going with the genocide.
“Anything but voting for Trump is supporting Harris.”
Nonsensical, right?
Biden and Trump are equally bad on genocide, there is no “worse”. If Harris chooses to signal she’s continuing Biden’s genocide support I’m out again. I’m willing to compromise on Harris’ generally but nothing has changed in my tolerance for pro-genocide candidates, and nothing ever will.
Luckily not funding genocide is an easy hurdle to cross. We’ll see if Harris manages to do it.
Nope. I’ve been supportive of Harris up to this point since her stepping forward as potential nominee. I genuinely hope she can demonstrate that she’s against the genocide.
There will be two candidates to choose from who are going to collectively get 90+ percent of the vote. You can vote for the lesser of 2 evils or waste your vote on third party.
There’s no such thing as “ultra genocide” and if there was, it’s already happening in Gaza and it’s being fueled by a Democratic administration, not a Republican one.
Uh huh, and how realistic do you actually think that is? Israel is going to allow Trump to drop a nuclear bomb on their border…
The fact that the retort is “It could be worse, they could drop a literal nuke on Gaza” should be an indicator that what you’re arguing as an acceptable alternative is indefensibly extreme.
Do you know nothing about Project 2025? It will cause more genocide. Genocide in your country.
Do you want to see Latinos carted away and queer kids committing suicide after being forced into “conversion therapy?” Because that’s exactly what Trump will bring.
How about all the other people? Millions of people. Fuck them? Because she’s just having a meeting with the perpetrator of a different genocide on the other side of the planet? A genocide that Trump will also perpetuate and has already said he would make worse?
So essentially your refusal to “support genocide” in another country will make that genocide worse and add more genocide to the mix.
But hey, this is all about sparing you from potential harm, right? Fuck all those illegals and homos.
You dismiss the idea that the humanity of Palestinians is equal to your own. Its ok for them to die under the bombs and weapons we supply to Israel, as long as it allows us to avoid our own domestic discomfort. We differ on this fact.
I’m part of the groups that will probably be most immediately effected by a Trump admin. That fear will not push me to support a genocide.
If the American system is broken and corrupted then we as Americans should be facing and reconciling those problems ourselves, not transferring our own potential discomfort and suffering overseas to kids that are out of sight and out of mind.
It’s about millions of other people. People whose lives you apparently don’t care about. I guess they’re too brown or too queer to be part of that whole ‘humanity being equal’ thing.
Yes, it is. It’s cowardice and self-interest. You’re not going to be able to flip this.
You can’t on one hand claim you care about the hypothetical suffering millions while arguing for ignoring a very real on-going genocide funded by your representatives.
“Just let Democrats get away with funding the slaughter of Gazans as long as we can skirt around the consequences of our corrupt politics here.”
Maybe this will help; imagine the Gazans are white Americans. Ignore that they’re brown and live behind some imaginary line “somewhere else” in the world and instead pretend you see them as equal to you.
When you take the perspective that they’re just as human and deserving of life as any of the other domestic groups you’re talking about, you realize that Biden is, at this very moment, doing a “Project 2025” of his own. It’s just against human beings who happen to be 7,000 miles away instead of closer to you.
If Harris chooses to continue Bidens policy on this, I can’t vote for her, exactly the same as I can’t vote for Trump or Biden or any other zionist.
Do explain to me how it’s self-interest when I am cishet and white.
And again- the “real ongoing genocide” will be made worse by Trump. You just obviously don’t care about that. And if you don’t feel like voting for either of them, just stay home and don’t vote. Why waste your time or energy?
the “real ongoing genocide” will be made worse by Trump.
Why are you putting this in quotes? It’s an on-going genocide.
And there’s nothing Trump can do to make what’s hapoening in Gaza any worse. Israel is doing exactly as they please. There us no more room to push the needle. The fact that you think there’s room for “worse” makes me think you don’t actually understand what’s happening there.
Even if Trump sent troops to help with the killing it wouldn’t do anything, because it’s a full-blown genocide already and the only thing Israel needs to continue it is what we’ve bern giving them.
I am just so relieved that most people seem capable of understanding nuance.
By all means figure out if you can somehow give us a better candidate. But when it’s time for you to actually do something real, remember to play the hand you have.
Having different values from you does not mean they don’t understand nuance. They’re not stupid. They just have a moral boundary that they refuse to cross: supporting genocide. If the lesser evil involves voting for a politician who provides military and financial assistance to a genocidal regime, then I would say that the only morally correct course of action is revolution.
No, a working class revolution. A general strike. Whatever you want to call it when the working class refuse to capitulate to the demands of the ruling class. And if necessary we will defend ourselves, but violence is not the goal. The goal is to remove the ruling class from power, by any means necessary. By refusing to provide for them, and to follow their demands, they lose their power, and alternative structures for society without imbalances of power or systems of oppression can be formed.
I hear you. I feel that. But just remember to play the hand you actually have as best you can. Sometimes the situation sucks but it’s still up to us to make decisions.
I support your diversity of tactics, I just don’t think the American people are there with you yet… So keep on pushing us.
Sure, I get that too. I completely understand why people would’ve voted for Biden, despite all of the glaring reasons not to. I sympathise entirely with your situation, it’s really a shitty decision to be left with. I just think it’s unfair to say that people who disagree with your decision are, necessarily, not understanding the nuance of the situation. They probably all understand why you’d make your decision and for the most part don’t really have a problem with it. Most of us just want an acknowledgment and an understanding that both sides are fucking horrible and that we need to find a third solution, whatever that may be, in the long run, because voting for the least worst option will only work for so long, and we’re rapidly running out of road.
The presidency isn’t the right place to dig your heels in to force a massive cultural shift. Those candidates are arising from the most average aggregate American opinions, it’s how they got there.
From the top down, a nudge is all we’re going to get. Even if you win all your policy positions, that will probably still be true.
If we’re successful at winning hearts and minds, better candidates will arise from us, that’s what representation is.
Local politics is so ripe for disruption when it comes to expertise and integrity, hell even the US house is like a kindergarten playground with bottom of the barrel officials.
Meanwhile we need to play some defense, especially in the court appointments. We need to focus on our communities, but at the same time not giving away an inch more than we’re forced to.
Even when you think you’re losing, there is still always one best possible thing that you can do. Maybe rolling over is it, if you believe D and R are the exact same thing, but I happen to think there’s a lot more at stake here in the long game.
The medium is the message. Americans view their politics as a vote they do every four years. Only by making them accept the fact that voting will never accomplish the change they want to see, will they ever be willing to wake up to the fact that they need to do something beyond voting.
You can vote for fascism now, or fascism later. You can’t vote for no fascism. I agree that fascism later is the better choice, but you have to take that choice knowing that you’re not helping solve any problems, you’re just doing harm prevention.
The wealthy elite will never, ever allow any change that challenges their hegemony to happen through the political system, the media, the courts - all institutions are firmly under their entire control.
Only by acknowledging the truth can you do something about it.
I won’t support pro-genocide candidates. Yes really.
She really should not be meeting with right-wing fascists.
Meeting with someone ≠ Endorsing them
World politics is about negotiation. I’d rather she tucked into the conflict and tried to improve the situation than ignoring it.
You’re talking to someone who just told me that it wouldn’t even make a difference if Trump marched U.S. troops into Gaza.
You’re deeply dishonest.
And yet that’s almost literally what you said.
https://lemmy.world/comment/11358062
So it’s weird that you’re calling me deeply dishonest.
Trying to cut out context is dishonest.
You want to believe that the IDF is held back by lack of personnel, but they’re not. They are not being held back from anything they want to do. Putting US soldiers in Gaza does not add to their capacity to continue the genocide exactly as they wish.
Zionists keep trying to convince everyone that Trump would be worse on this, which is simply a way of refusing to accept the reality of just how bad it really is.
There is no context in which “more dead people is not a worse outcome” is a moral answer.
And the context in which you said that saving one life during the Holocaust didn’t matter?
I’d say most people here would be absolutely willing to save a single person’s life from genocide.
You’re not understanding what I was saying (or you’re continuing to try to intentionally misrepresent what I was saying).
Using your analogy, you’re the one saying 6 million deaths is acceptable as long as it doesn’t get to six million and one. You’re trying to simultaneously say we need to accept mass slaughter to avoid mass slaughter, it’s nonsense.
The “six million deaths” are happening in Gaza right now. They are actually suffering and dying, but you’re telling us we should accept that since you’re afraid of not being able to kick the political can down the road and kerp pretending everything can be fine.
It doesn’t matter, I can’t make you understand why rewarding the Democrats for genocidal fascist policy is a losing strategy when they’re suppose to be the alternative to genocidal fascists. You either let yourself understand it or you don’t.
deleted by creator
That is not what I am saying at all. If you’re going to accuse me of intentionally misrepresenting what you’re saying, don’t do it to me.
You’re deeply misguided.
This is exactly why Netanyahu is doing what he is doing. He wants Trump. He knows the US doesn’t/can’t lose an ally in the region and he forces the administrations hand, which makes them look bad to their supporters. Those supporters stop supporting… and then Trump gets elected.
Don’t let Netanyahu play you. Don’t fall into his trap. Vote in local elections for people opposed to the genocide. Reach out to them and express it is a huge, maybe the only, concern of yours. That is how you bring change.
Removing yourself from the conversation doesn’t make the problem go away.
There are millions that just don’t vote. Never have, never will. So their stance has no impact. It is worse to be willing to use that vote and then throw it away on a single issue that won’t change, no matter the candidate (and honestly in this case one candidate there is a chance vs one where there is zero chance for Gaza and things get worse for Ukraine).
We’ve effectively been given the Trolley Problem and, instead of playing, you’re choosing to walk away and whatever happens, happens, as long as you feel good.
It can be endorsing, yes. There’s a reason so many democrats are not attending – going to Netanyahu’s speech lends him legitimacy and a greater perception of support.
Stopping the genocide doesn’t require negotiation, you withhold aid until they stop.
But as I keep saying, Harris will need to find way to signal that her meeting isn’t in support of Netanyahu. If she goes in and is giving him hugs and holding his hand up in unity and that kind of bullshit, that’s a really bad sign. It can go either way, I’m just stating that I won’t support genocide just because it gets a fresh face on it, Harris needs to prove her commitment to holding Netanyahu to account in a real, material way.
Anything but voting for Harris would be supporting Trump, an even worse pro-genocide candidate. You can’t equate Harris, who’s calling for a ceasefire, with Trump, who gave Israel Jerusalem and is telling Israel to keep going with the genocide.
“Anything but voting for Trump is supporting Harris.”
Nonsensical, right?
Biden and Trump are equally bad on genocide, there is no “worse”. If Harris chooses to signal she’s continuing Biden’s genocide support I’m out again. I’m willing to compromise on Harris’ generally but nothing has changed in my tolerance for pro-genocide candidates, and nothing ever will.
Luckily not funding genocide is an easy hurdle to cross. We’ll see if Harris manages to do it.
Yes but that’s the “things are bad (Harris), so might as well make them worse (Trump)” attitude.
No. This is about Democratic support of genocide. I simply won’t support any candidate willing to help kill and starve children.
If Dems want my vote the price is the same as it’s been; don’t support far-right fascists committing genocide.
Very, very low bar.
Bullshit. You’d find some other reason to whine and discourage others from voting. No one’s buying your both sides shit.
Nope. I’ve been supportive of Harris up to this point since her stepping forward as potential nominee. I genuinely hope she can demonstrate that she’s against the genocide.
There will be two candidates to choose from who are going to collectively get 90+ percent of the vote. You can vote for the lesser of 2 evils or waste your vote on third party.
“Genocide is bad, so I’m going to support the candidate who supports ultra genocide with extra genocide at home instead”
There’s no such thing as “ultra genocide” and if there was, it’s already happening in Gaza and it’s being fueled by a Democratic administration, not a Republican one.
I would consider calls to nuke Gaza ultra genocide
Uh huh, and how realistic do you actually think that is? Israel is going to allow Trump to drop a nuclear bomb on their border…
The fact that the retort is “It could be worse, they could drop a literal nuke on Gaza” should be an indicator that what you’re arguing as an acceptable alternative is indefensibly extreme.
Do you know nothing about Project 2025? It will cause more genocide. Genocide in your country.
Do you want to see Latinos carted away and queer kids committing suicide after being forced into “conversion therapy?” Because that’s exactly what Trump will bring.
I won’t support genocide in another country to spare myself from potential harm, no, that would be morally bankrupt.
I don’t vote based on fear. I can’t be threatened in that way.
Yourself? This isn’t about you.
How about all the other people? Millions of people. Fuck them? Because she’s just having a meeting with the perpetrator of a different genocide on the other side of the planet? A genocide that Trump will also perpetuate and has already said he would make worse?
So essentially your refusal to “support genocide” in another country will make that genocide worse and add more genocide to the mix.
But hey, this is all about sparing you from potential harm, right? Fuck all those illegals and homos.
You dismiss the idea that the humanity of Palestinians is equal to your own. Its ok for them to die under the bombs and weapons we supply to Israel, as long as it allows us to avoid our own domestic discomfort. We differ on this fact.
I’m part of the groups that will probably be most immediately effected by a Trump admin. That fear will not push me to support a genocide.
If the American system is broken and corrupted then we as Americans should be facing and reconciling those problems ourselves, not transferring our own potential discomfort and suffering overseas to kids that are out of sight and out of mind.
For fuck’s sake, it’s also not about me.
It’s about millions of other people. People whose lives you apparently don’t care about. I guess they’re too brown or too queer to be part of that whole ‘humanity being equal’ thing.
Yes, it is. It’s cowardice and self-interest. You’re not going to be able to flip this.
You can’t on one hand claim you care about the hypothetical suffering millions while arguing for ignoring a very real on-going genocide funded by your representatives.
“Just let Democrats get away with funding the slaughter of Gazans as long as we can skirt around the consequences of our corrupt politics here.”
Maybe this will help; imagine the Gazans are white Americans. Ignore that they’re brown and live behind some imaginary line “somewhere else” in the world and instead pretend you see them as equal to you.
When you take the perspective that they’re just as human and deserving of life as any of the other domestic groups you’re talking about, you realize that Biden is, at this very moment, doing a “Project 2025” of his own. It’s just against human beings who happen to be 7,000 miles away instead of closer to you.
If Harris chooses to continue Bidens policy on this, I can’t vote for her, exactly the same as I can’t vote for Trump or Biden or any other zionist.
Do explain to me how it’s self-interest when I am cishet and white.
And again- the “real ongoing genocide” will be made worse by Trump. You just obviously don’t care about that. And if you don’t feel like voting for either of them, just stay home and don’t vote. Why waste your time or energy?
Why are you putting this in quotes? It’s an on-going genocide.
And there’s nothing Trump can do to make what’s hapoening in Gaza any worse. Israel is doing exactly as they please. There us no more room to push the needle. The fact that you think there’s room for “worse” makes me think you don’t actually understand what’s happening there.
Even if Trump sent troops to help with the killing it wouldn’t do anything, because it’s a full-blown genocide already and the only thing Israel needs to continue it is what we’ve bern giving them.
I am just so relieved that most people seem capable of understanding nuance.
By all means figure out if you can somehow give us a better candidate. But when it’s time for you to actually do something real, remember to play the hand you have.
Having different values from you does not mean they don’t understand nuance. They’re not stupid. They just have a moral boundary that they refuse to cross: supporting genocide. If the lesser evil involves voting for a politician who provides military and financial assistance to a genocidal regime, then I would say that the only morally correct course of action is revolution.
What kind of revolution? The kind that involves more soldiers and cops raping citizens here? Because as far as I know that’s the only type there is.
No, a working class revolution. A general strike. Whatever you want to call it when the working class refuse to capitulate to the demands of the ruling class. And if necessary we will defend ourselves, but violence is not the goal. The goal is to remove the ruling class from power, by any means necessary. By refusing to provide for them, and to follow their demands, they lose their power, and alternative structures for society without imbalances of power or systems of oppression can be formed.
I hear you. I feel that. But just remember to play the hand you actually have as best you can. Sometimes the situation sucks but it’s still up to us to make decisions.
I support your diversity of tactics, I just don’t think the American people are there with you yet… So keep on pushing us.
Sure, I get that too. I completely understand why people would’ve voted for Biden, despite all of the glaring reasons not to. I sympathise entirely with your situation, it’s really a shitty decision to be left with. I just think it’s unfair to say that people who disagree with your decision are, necessarily, not understanding the nuance of the situation. They probably all understand why you’d make your decision and for the most part don’t really have a problem with it. Most of us just want an acknowledgment and an understanding that both sides are fucking horrible and that we need to find a third solution, whatever that may be, in the long run, because voting for the least worst option will only work for so long, and we’re rapidly running out of road.
The presidency isn’t the right place to dig your heels in to force a massive cultural shift. Those candidates are arising from the most average aggregate American opinions, it’s how they got there.
From the top down, a nudge is all we’re going to get. Even if you win all your policy positions, that will probably still be true.
If we’re successful at winning hearts and minds, better candidates will arise from us, that’s what representation is.
Local politics is so ripe for disruption when it comes to expertise and integrity, hell even the US house is like a kindergarten playground with bottom of the barrel officials.
Meanwhile we need to play some defense, especially in the court appointments. We need to focus on our communities, but at the same time not giving away an inch more than we’re forced to.
Even when you think you’re losing, there is still always one best possible thing that you can do. Maybe rolling over is it, if you believe D and R are the exact same thing, but I happen to think there’s a lot more at stake here in the long game.
The medium is the message. Americans view their politics as a vote they do every four years. Only by making them accept the fact that voting will never accomplish the change they want to see, will they ever be willing to wake up to the fact that they need to do something beyond voting.
You can vote for fascism now, or fascism later. You can’t vote for no fascism. I agree that fascism later is the better choice, but you have to take that choice knowing that you’re not helping solve any problems, you’re just doing harm prevention.
The wealthy elite will never, ever allow any change that challenges their hegemony to happen through the political system, the media, the courts - all institutions are firmly under their entire control.
Only by acknowledging the truth can you do something about it.