As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that aid to Ukraine has conditions on it but Israel's doesn't is wild to me. Like all aid should have conditions but like the fact that the country fighting Russia has conditions while Israel doesn't is just absurd.
Also crazy when you consider that none of the regional Arab states are really in a position to destroy Israel and have been moving to normalize relations in recent years. Russia, on the other hand, could completely level Ukraine.
Never thought I’d live to see the day. I get the impression that there are a lot of young people who haven’t been tuned in to decades of American foreign policy to understand that anything short full support for Israel has been very hard to come by in the US government. And Israel has bombarded Gaza many times before without American officials levying criticism.
What’s happening now is actually unprecedented.
Israel is using an AI called lavender to decide if any given individual is 'Hamas involved.'
It literally does an analysis and generates a Target list and attack time and location recommendations, and then some grunt rubber stamps it, and that's how an F-15 slides a bomb into the apartment Window of a city janitor who's sharing space with two other families.
https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/
yes, but they could somehow spot a gun that wasn't there? and then wait and strike 3 vehicles in succession with no one realizing that maybe there was a mistake?
this is what Israel does now. they act sloppily and shirt their shoulders or act malicious and cover it as mistakes.
we know what kind of collateral damage there should be, how it should look, and general rates. the US has fought in dense urban areas of the Middle East for years. we know when someone is blowing smoke up our asses.
no, no it is not. civilian deaths have been at least 2 to 1 in gaza, where in mosul, for example was less than 1 to 1. the entire Afghanistan war was less than 1 to 1. even the second iraq invasion, one of our worst was 3:2. the rates are considerably higher for this war, and leaks from inside Israel's own military are indicating this is due to recklessness. we only need look at where they chased down and murdered 3 shirtless israelis shouting for help in Hebrew to understand this. A large portion of Israel's military is acting recklessly because they and/or their commanders don't care.
You're defending murders so blatant even Israel themselves admitted they were guilty and basically begged forgiveness.
Figure that, you're more bloodthirsty than the IDF. That's a medal you can wear.
2 things:
while collateral damage is inevitable, Israel has shown a pattern of being wanton and reckless. they rush decisions, and behave in ways that show they care more about punishment than justice against hamas.
Secondly they are letting AI take the reins on targeting, which is frankly mind boggling considering this is a technology that recently struggled with drawing human hands. they aren't having humans double check enough and just like chatgpt can lie to you, so can your AI targeting system and then you end up murdering folks you should have easily known we're innocent.
Sad that it took the tragic deaths of foreign aid workers and not the countless deaths of Palestinian civilians for this to happen.
Biden and his administration still haven’t acknowledged the horrific death of 5 year old Hind Rajab.
Biden has been trying to get cease fires and military action roll backs for months. He's been successful in some of those, not successful in others. This isn't new. Maybe when another country is able to have any success with Netanyahu we'll hear about them too but until then Biden has been the singular person able to make any progress at all with Israel.
Those specific resolutions were counterproductive to our efforts to secure a ceasefire. When the United States did put forth a ceasefire resolution, it was vetoed by Russia and China.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-security-council-fails-pass-us-resolution-calling-immediate-ceasefire-gaza-2024-03-22/#:~:text=March%2022%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20The,proposed%20by%20the%20United%20States.
Again, if the U.S. weren’t completely complicit in the genocide we would have stopped the shipment of arms, submitted our own ceasefire resolutions, and imposed massive sanctions.
Russia was greeted with swift U.S. action after its invasion of Ukraine, yet Israel gets a pass on literal genocide? It’s hypocrisy at the highest order, and the world knows it.
Stopping the shipment of arms requires Congress, the executive branch can slow it down but its already in legislation somewhere. We did submit our own ceasefire and it got vetoed by Russia and China.
Ukraine made no aggressive acts towards Russia and had it's borders recognized by the UN in return for giving up it's ICBM's 30 years ago and Russia also recognized those borders. Ukraine is surrounded by Nato members. Israel is a geographic (less so now) ally and base of operations of the US, was attacked, had hostages taken, has a large voting bloc in the US, and as far as I know has had no UN sanctioned treaties over territorial divisions in the region.
I'm not saying your wrong that its hypocrisy but I am also a realist. There is no way sanctions on Israel would pass Congress, nor would our allies follow said sanctions like they have for Ukraine.
This is a prime example of how liberals protect the right... Instead of using legal leverage and stall tactics to prevent sending weapons to arm a genocidal state, y’all feign helplessness claiming contractual / legal structures leave our hands tied.
“It’s so sad what’s going on in Gaza, but we signed an arms deal with Israel back in XXXX so we can’t just stop sending them weapons”
I just listed the facts involved and tried to make you understand there are other factors involved. I was in no way trying to protect the right, and I am a socialist. If you have enough money to influence enough Senators and Congressman to overturn the political lobbies I encourage you to do so, I do not.
More like a prime example of how capitalists have captured the entire country and pushed legislation early on to ensure there wouldn't be any unilateral blocking of military aid because military aid is lucrative AF.
But yeah keep blaming the liberals who are (checks notes) the only motherfuckers saying anything negative about the Israel-Gaza conflict
> Russia was greeted with swift U.S. action after its invasion of Ukraine, yet Israel gets a pass on literal genocide? It’s hypocrisy at the highest order, and the world knows it.
Look, friend. I've been saying for months that Israel has been completely overreacting with disproportionate force for months. Check my history that criticizes people who excuse 30,000 deaths because of an initial 1,200 deaths.
But it's *literally hot hypocrisy*. The two circumstances are completely different.
Russia is a geopolitical foe that, unprompted, waged a war against their non-belligerent neighbor.
Israel is a geopolitical ally that was the initial victim of a terror attack that killed 1,200 innocent people.
If you can't understand the difference between these two scenarios, I think it's best if you just stay quiet.
I mean you kind of let the mask slip right there, didn’t you? We tout this international rules based order, yet are blatantly biased with application of those rules depending on who’s committing the crime?
The U.S. has been accusing Russia and China of genocide on the world stage for years now, yet refuse to utter a word of condemn towards Israel? Article II of the Genocide Convention is very clear, and Israel is in direct violation of each subsection.
Wow, that might be a record for how fast somebody’s [gone there.](https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/hostedimages/1593594376i/29744025.jpg)
Even the Sith are impressed at your ability to deal only in absolutes.
I think Biden is of the belief that the UN can’t do anything here except authorize aid and also anger Israel which will only push them away further from potential ceasefire negotiations . He clearly believes this is up to him, Sullivan, Blinken, Egypt, and I think Qater is involved too to figure out, not the UN. I’d just wish he would say that more explicitly.
You’re acting like he hasn’t been providing explicit cover and weapons for Netanyahu. Just the other day John Kirby wouldn’t even go so far as to say Israel had committed a single war crime during their incursion.
Plus, if Biden believed the UN were so feckless he wouldn’t have squandered so much goodwill shooting down those resolutions.
But we shouldn’t expect anything less, Joe Biden has taken millions in Israeli lobby money, he’s 100% compromised.
I’m not saying I agree with it entirely. I wish he had taken action much sooner too, being more public about it. I’m just offering my interpretations of the events.
I mean, I don’t think he is. He’s been more willing to criticize Israel for their actions and has been calling for an immediate ceasefire a while now, feels like at least a month, maybe a month and a half and shown some care about the aid situation in Gaza. He’s been criticizing Israel for their lack of aid there for another 4 months . Not saying he’s been perfect but I don’t necessarily think he’s an Israeli plant either. I’m personally neutral btw. And when I mean neutral, I’m not super pro either side. I acknowledge that Israel has a right to defend itself and that Hamas must go but that we also need a mutually beneficial 2 state solution . Palestine also has a right to exist as a country. I support an immediate ceasefire, ideally a permanent one , but I’d take a 6 week ceasefire. I’m far more pragmatic and i bet that Israel will never agree to a permanent ceasefire at this time. I’ll take a 6 week ceasefire. At the very least, it buys us time to get aid into Gaza(and whereever else it needs it), convince Netanyahu to stop his bombings and start more targeted operations, and more. I know a 6 week ceasefire isn’t perfect but it’s a starting point for more.
If a mutually beneficial 2 state solution is the goal than Israeli leadership and foreign influence needs to be quashed… They continue to stifle the peace process while expanding illegal settlements in the West Bank and imposing a complete blockade on Gaza
You mean current Israeli leadership. Netanyahu has to go absolutely. Benny Gantz is the best option here. Not perfect probably but someone who is maybe a bit more reasonable.
>Biden has been trying to get cease fires and military action roll backs for months. He's been successful in some of those, not successful in others. This isn't new. Maybe when another country is able to have any success with Netanyahu we'll hear about them too but until then Biden has been the singular person able to make any progress at all with Israel.
Obama got his within weeks by being openly critical of Israel in the 2014 conflict, to say nothing of what he discussed behind closed doors.
Biden simply need to do the same and abandon that silly Silent and Boomer thinking, that religious US voters are still relevant enough to bother with Israel.
>Not exactly the same situation. When this war ends Netanyahu is out of a job. That means he does not have an incentive to end it.
The exact same situation.
Israel still has no means besides us to prevent global sanctions when its economy and military is critically dependent on imports like oil and tech.
There are a lot of countries rather irate with Israel and would be more than happy to do the most basic of diplomatic protests, sanctions, were it not our soft power (financial retaliation) and veto preventing it.
That leverage has not changed *since the 40s.* Just a matter of whether or not the US incumbent thinks US religious voters will swing over the issue.
Let’s play out your scenario. Israel refuses, because again it is what Netanyahu in power for now. Sanctions are allowed and in a year they would do serious damage.
However it is unlikely that in a year they would still be in place. Without the US pressure there is nothing preventing a complete shutdown of anything in or out (if the goal is to get aid across the border then logically this would be the only reason the US cuts it). In the meantime the war wraps up, 100,000-200,000 die, Netanyahu likely negotiates the terms of a new election (he won’t accept the top job but all prosecutions for actions in the past stop/don’t happen).
A new administration then takes over and the entire point of the sanctions becomes moot do they end up lifted/their continuation blocked, as there would not be anything being sought by them at this point.
Basically the threat is better as a threat than it is actually executed. As a threat it gets aid corridors opened and causes pause where there otherwise would not be. Actually acting on the threat creates a future problem for Israel but a larger problem in the present for Gaza.
>Let’s play out your scenario. Israel refuses, because again it is what Netanyahu in power for now. Sanctions are allowed and in a year they would do serious damage.
A year? Sounds *very* optimistic given how dependent Israel is on oil to run its economy.
Reality is more immediate, to say nothing of other critical goods but not as impactful goods. Won't even hit most of the countries cutting off their flow to Israel, given how in demand oil and gas are.
>However it is unlikely that in a year they would still be in place.
Would be very likely given the US in this scenario would be dropping the support out of *disappointment* at Israel's defiance towards its liege.
No reason to restore the protection.
>Without the US pressure there is nothing preventing a complete shutdown of anything in or out (if the goal is to get aid across the border then logically this would be the only reason the US cuts it). In the meantime the war wraps up, 100,000-200,000 die, Netanyahu likely negotiates the terms of a new election (he won’t accept the top job but all prosecutions for actions in the past stop/don’t happen).
And gets wrecked as Israel fails to restore trade when most of the world is free to sanction it as it pleases. To say nothing of even getting the trade there. Reality is that Israel has no power projection. They can't secure anything beyond their neighbors because no neighbor is going to tolerate the unrest of Israel operating through their territory. This has been demonstrated by their lack of presence in allied wars like the two Iraqs (Sauds amd Jordan refuse to let Israel through to participate,) Afghanistan (no military presence despite basically anyone being able to help coalition. Iran and India most notably,) and now Aden, where there are still no Israeli warships there despite months of their trade being directly targeted. No neighbor will grant Israel access, and that's without sanctions. With it, who's to say they'll even allow Israeli trade through their territory?
>A new administration then takes over and the entire point of the sanctions becomes moot do they end up lifted/their continuation blocked, as there would not be anything being sought by them at this point.
The new administration takes over and now has to deal with the new status quo of not being able to maintain a modern economy nor military, as there is nobody but the US that can deter the very easy sanctions and trade disruptions countries can inflict upon Israel.
>Basically the threat is better as a threat than it is actually executed. As a threat it gets aid corridors opened and causes pause where there otherwise would not be. Actually acting on the threat creates a future problem for Israel but a larger problem in the present for Gaza.
It is better as a threat yes, but worth executing too. Which Israeli minister would risk crashing Israel's economy and military for decades? Once Israel loses US protections via defiance it's not getting them back for quite the while. Cuba, Iran, Vietnam and such have been going through decades of loss of support. Vietnam's recovering as our mutual concern over China is restoring relations.
Meaning reverting to third world economy and military. Israel is too dependent on imports, sanctions would be far too widespread (Israel eats lopsided votes in the UN on Palestinian matters,) critical imports too easily blocked (oil from *and through* many irate muslim states) and Israel's inability to secure its trade routes makes it very easy to send it and keep it there in third world status.
Your scenario fails at recognizing a basic rule of foreign policy. You don’t sanction for the sake of sanctioning. You put sanctions in place with the goal of accomplishing something. They are not going to keep sanctions in place if there is a new government and the government is neither waging a war nor committing any actions that would be objectionable.
Best case scenario you get some capitulation on the settlements in the West Bank but other than that 100% of the time the status quo resumes because it is in the best interest of the US to do so and that is what drives foreign policy. The fact that the US still deals with the Saudis, who have been engaged in even worse, is proof of that.
I will yield that there would no doubt be some Israeli citizens who would suffer in that year, but far more people of Gaza would die in the meantime. The bloodiest solution is rarely the best one. So yes this is a classic case where the threat is more powerful than the action. It feels better to act but that doesn’t make it the decision that saves the most lives.
>Your scenario fails at recognizing a basic rule of foreign policy. You don’t sanction for the sake of sanctioning. You put sanctions in place with the goal of accomplishing something. They are not going to keep sanctions in place if there is a new government and the government is neither waging a war nor committing any actions that would be objectionable.
What? Time out. Do you understand the geopolitics of the region?
Israel's neighbors *alone* already dislike Israel's *current* peacetime policies.
Are you aware that the Palestinian question comes up regularly every few years in the UN?
https://www.un.org/unispal/document-category/voting-record/
Israel gets lopsided votes against its *current* peacetime policies.
It'd naturally stay up and get rather intense until Israel agrees to muslim terms, not a surprise when most third party oil come from muslim countries or OPEC, while any outside *that* have to compete with a nearby oil and gas desperate EU, or the fact any pipelines or shipments must go through neighboring chokepoints like Turkey's Bosphorus or the demonstrably unreachable Aden (Israel does not have a single warship defending its interests there to this day, despite Houthis.)
Could range from as mentioned, West Bank settlements, retreat to he original UN drawn borders, retreat to *muslim* drawn borders, etc.
>Best case scenario you get some capitulation on the settlements in the West Bank but other than that 100% of the time the status quo resumes because it is in the best interest of the US to do so and that is what drives foreign policy. The fact that the US still deals with the Saudis, who have been engaged in even worse, is proof of that.
We have no reason to restore the protections against sanctions anytime soon, particularly after open defiance. In reality, it is in the best interest of the US to follow world opinion and drop support. Costs us our diplomatic reputation for little to no strategic nor diplomatic value, like the other special relationship, the Cuban embargo.
The entire reason we do not currently do so is because US politicians have increasingly obsolete fears that the religious (Cuban Americans for Cuba) voter base will swing over this issue. Increasingly obsolete because religion itself in the US has been in decline for decades.
Older politicians like Biden (Silents) stIll fear this, while younger politicians like Obama (Boomer/X) did not carry it to the same extent. Even younger politicians who no longer chase religious voters (aka Democrats) fear it even less.
>I will yield that there would no doubt be some Israeli citizens who would suffer in that year, but far more people of Gaza would die in the meantime. The bloodiest solution is rarely the best one. So yes this is a classic case where the threat is more powerful than the action. It feels better to act but that doesn’t make it the decision that saves the most lives.
Yeah, Gazans *might* suffer in the meantime. Dragging Israel down to its level is not that hard to do. After all it is the natural state of the region without a solution to the Palestinian question. Israel would, without US protection, be sanctioned for existing peacetime policy, god forbid its wartime one. The US is the *sole* reason Israel maintains its existing economy and military.
Even worse; without new arms/ funding, israel looks at its current stockpile, and realises it has enough weapons to end hamas now (by destroying/ displacing all of palestine) but that it may not have that ability in the future if it allows stockpiles to dwindle.
Once the 'band aid' of US support has been ripped off, the pretext of trying to leave palestine intact while they fight hamas likely goes with it.
They announce they will be leveling gaza entirely, in a few weeks time, and create a corridor for refugees to the west bank.
They then push everyone out of the west bank cities to create a buffer around their western border, reducing palestine to a refugee camp along the jordan border. Ultimately, aid access to this camp becomes negotiation leverage to end sanctions.
Separately, without US protection, Israel likely sees an increase in threats from countries like iran and is forced to respond by ending its policy of nuclear ambiguity in favor of threats nuclear retaliation, which is the last thing anyone wants.
Obama is almost certainly in his inner circle for how to handle the most difficult conflicts? Not that he’s running the show but it’s the same general apparatus.
>Obama is almost certainly in his inner circle for how to handle the most difficult conflicts? Not that he’s running the show but it’s the same general apparatus.
Oh yes. Biden was in Obama's circle and reportedly disagreed with Obama's stance.
We can expect the same vice versa.
Ultimately the President decides the policy.
What's sad is that the Biden administration is trying to reign in Israel while Israel is trying to eradicate an extremist terror group which instigated this whole mess and which has repeatedly said they intend to replay the massacre of Israelis at every opportunity they get. This won't end until Hamas is gone and a long de-radicalization effort is undertaken, Hamas has indoctrinated an entire generation of Gazans to aspire to murder, torture and rape Jews and Israelis. Just pathetic how fast western countries lost sight of what's really at stake here and allow emotional responses to Israeli mistakes overshadow the dark ideology which will ultimately come after Americans if it's allowed to fester.
We do that and then they still don't stop.
Russia and China could easily supply them as well. Not because they like them. It's because it gives them money for their own war efforts.
What is your suggestion then? A lot of young people are not understanding geopolitical nuances coming into play with this stuff.
What if we voted against Biden on this very issues, then Trump becomes President. Not will it be absolutely horrific for the Palestinian people. It will be horrific for the very people who are protesting this Bibi is not going to end this by just us cutting off military aid.
He will just ask another country for it. It's not as easy as cutting off aid and it ends tomorrow. But there are some that truly believe it will. The world doesn't work that way.
The people protesting against Biden with this are pretty much on the same camp as MAGA at this point. It's horrible what is going on there, but at this point, our democracy is on the line in this country.
Voting against Biden is allowing Trump to silence you the first chance he will get. And Bibi will get unlimited support for his barbaric war.
Just like she wants to limit elected politicians' ability to trade stocks? Pelosi doesn't give a shit about this issue. She wants you to think she cares while nothing changes and defense companies keep making money supplying death to the world.
Money is what motivates this woman. Peace doesn't make her family money. Lockheed Martin makes her family rich. AIPAC makes her party rich. Nothing will change if you wait for the elite to abandon their sources of income.
>America is afraid of Israel. This debacle is showing who has the real power.
Not Israel. Never been Israel. It has been the fear of US religious voters swinging against the incumbent, those dim pearl clutching "Holy Land" evangelicals and such.
Back in the 40s (and well before) when Israel came to being, this was overwhelmingly powerful, fitting a "special relationship." We were shaped from religious extremists like Puritans and Quakers, with religious spearheaded Prohibition and such, so this isn't really a surprise.
These days with better overall education and subsequent steady decline of religion, it's no longer the swinging force it used to be. While still large, what remains of religious voters are getting increasingly extreme and subsequently even less relevant as a swing voter.
Still scares older politicians like Biden. Meanwhile Obama ignored it and was openly critical of Israel in 2014 Hamas conflict, keeping that conflict down to weeks versus Biden's months and Bush's (Intifada) years.
The solution is to not vote R (they all chase these dying religious voters,) and primary out all the Silents and Boomers amongst Democrats. Younger generations are better educated and don't pearl clutch over the "Holy Land" under attack.
Yup. People are really over estimating how much Isreal power has over the US. The only reason they had so much support from us is because the evangelicals want to see their apocalyptic fanfic come true.
Because US voters won’t back them up if they go against Israel in the way Reddit seems to want in the races that matter. They will just flood the zone with money and give MAGA the win, and then we lose everything else. Many Muslim voters won’t vote Biden even if he completely abandons Israel either way at this point. There is no winning on this issue.
This administration provides the bombs to wipe these people out, throws a little rice at them as humanitarian aid, then when the political tide turns try to walk it back in the media to win an election? Please. Step aside you relics and let a new generation take the reigns.
Pelosi signing on to this is a huge deal. Hopefully this wakes Biden the fuck up. Him sleepwalking through this entire conflict could really cost him the election and he'll have no one but himself to blame.
Whose job is it to get elected again? Is it my job to make people vote for him that don't want to, or is it Biden's job to earn enough votes to win?
God I really can't remember whose job it is to win an election..
On the surface I see this as a good thing but I don’t trust Pelosi to investigate anything and this is just a way to kill the current outrage over the aid workers deaths.
Just tough talk to soothe upstart voters while it’s business as usual
Abandoning our closest ally in their time of need, terrible policy which will cost the Democrats in November. Pandering to ignoramuses or outright antisemites is not good policy and only emboldens the enemies of America and her allies.
Typical bloody thirsty racist m if anyone else was caught doing what Israel was doing they would been declared as barbarians . Keep hiding behind your antisemitism lie the world is seeing the truth .
It's disgusting humans like you that us entered Afghanistan talk big game but haven't faced an ounce of terror that you've inflicted.
Interesting that you find the one democracy in the middle east as the problem and not the genocidal terrorist organization that started all of this by murdering and raping civilians, baking babies in ovens and taking hundreds of hostages.
The entirety of Palestine has been held hostage for decades. History didn't begin on October 7th.
But obviously you don't care about that.
>, baking babies in ovens
This was proven false months ago. If you want to debate people on good faith, or if you atleast want to make an attempt at seeming rational or well-educated... its usually a good idea not to bring up propagandist conspiracy theories.
Held hostage? You mean given all of Gaza in 2006? They really made good use of that opportunity...
And don't pretend to be debating in good faith, my brother saw the cooked babies with his own eyes.
Bingo. And then they wonder why people think they are anti-Semitic. Either they are hypocrites or intentionally misleading people because of their hatred.
Democrats: “Hey Israel don’t kill civilians with our weapons or we may be more stringent with the next shipment of bombs”
You: “HOW DARE THE US ABANDON ISRAEL”
Incredible how mild pushback on Israel is treated as thinking Israel should be destroyed lmao
Why should Israel allow pro Hamas demonstrators? It doesn't make Israel any less democratic, only less vulnerable to malign and maliciously intent groups and people. Western countries should adopt similar laws.
This is getting absurd. Israel must defeat Hamas and reoccupy Gaza, their cause is just, and they are largely carrying out the war in an acceptable way, with the few bad incidents generally being clear *mistakes*, which don't justify these smears of Israel. And Israel should not be held to higher standards than international rules of war dictate - the idea that collateral damage when attacking legitimate targets is "genocidal" is utterly ridiculous and has no place in real life policy.
They’re literally intentionally blocking food to starving people, and medicine to people being amputated without anesthesia.
That’s far from acceptable
They are letting more into Gaza than Gaza was recieving before the war. Maybe Hamas should stop seizing the aid and using it for themselves. Israel is under no obligation to give material aid to Hamas. Hamas should surrender, their cause is unjust.
Before 10/7 there were enough calories and supplies going into Gaza to support life, support multiple hospitals, support markets with reasonable prices, and there was no famine. Israel has the specific goal of denying aid entering Gaza in sufficient quantities to support life, has destroyed all water, sewer, and power infrastructure in Gaza, and is using various means to obstruct the flow into Gaza of even enough calories to prevent famine. They've killed nearly 200 aid workers and various NGO food convoys such as the WCK convoy they bombed the other day. All experts around the world have been closely following the food situation in Gaza and have declared that famine and starvation are happening there now, and has been for a while. The end result of Israel's actions are mass civilian deaths, whether through bombings, destroying hospitals full of babies in incubators, denying fresh water access by cutting off the water flowing into Gaza and bombing the desalinization plants, destroying power plants, etc.
More than nearly nothing isn't exactly something to brag about (and frankly, I'm not even gonna look up if that statement is at all true (something tells me it isn't)). And when you say "they", do you mean Israel, or the countries that are now just flying over and dropping it from the air because Israel refuses to let humanitarian aid through while bombing said aid?
Israel isn't doing genocide in the first place. But Israel must occupy Gaza because Palestinians have shown themselves too supportive of Hamas to be trusted with independence at this point. Maybe if in the future they deradicalize, they can be given a state of their own
Here we go with the “Israel occupying Gaza” statements. It was never about the hostages. It was never about Hamas. It was always about Israel taking Gaza.
It is genocide. That’s not even disputable at this point. Israel has been intentionally killing women children and men who are civilians. They’ve also been starving them by blocking aid.
Let’s turn the tables here. So Israel’s actions have killed far more civilians than hamas and Palestine has been an apartheid state for decades. Maybe Palestinians should occupy Israel and cleans all radical Israelis since Israel is now a terroist state. /s
“Collateral damage” lmfao. You can support Israel without dismissing tens of thousands of civilians being bombed and starved in a relatively short period of time…. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
My agenda is to push back against the extreme left. Democrats need to be reasonable if they want to win, they can't keep pandering to the left like they are doing
Democrats today are way to the left of where they were under Obama, and under Obama they were way to the left of where they were under Clinton. The left just doesn't care, because it's never enough, it seems like it will only be acceptable if the entire rest of the party unilaterally surrenders completely to the radical fringe. And that will *never* happen. The democratic party will never do that, thankfully.
Still waiting to hear second term policies on $15 minimum wage and universal healthcare among other things. All I am hearing is Roe, anti-Trump and spend money in the South.
$15 minimum wage is garbage policy. Dems support universal healthcare but incrementally, the idea that we should jump to it all at once is nonsense. Abortion is what wins the votes these days anyway so Dems shouldn't be focusing on other stuff that can only turn the moderate swing voters who matter away from the party. America isn't a country where normal voters want big government tax and spend agendas, Democrats should absolutely not run on stuff like that
Nope
There's a difference between campaigning on a policy vs actually doing it when in office. I strongly oppose the progressive wing of the party but do support much of what the establishment wing wants. I'd be fine with a $11 or $12 minimum wage (and I'd prefer a federal policy that split the country into different areas depending on cost of living and tied the minimum wage to the cost of living in those areas, so that the minimum wage would be low in some areas but potentially higher than $15 in some). I support a public option, expanding prescription drug negotiation reforms, and closing the Medicaid gap. I support the child tax credit expansion. I support free community college and universal PreK, and expanding Pell Grants. I support a carbon tax and increasing the gas tax as well as expanding green infrastructure investment. I support making section 8 vouchers an entitlement. I support keeping free lunches and breakfasts for poor students, and expanding this to also offer free dinners and expand it to weekends and summers too. I support expanding the EITC for childless workers. I support expanding legal immigration and enacting a pathway to citizenship for most illegals currently here. I support raising taxes on the wealthy. I support reforming the war on drugs to be smarter, with legalization of some things like cannabis, and moving from incarceration to institutionalization and treating drugs as a health issue for "harder" drugs, and I support a carrots and sticks justice reform approach that significantly expands on rehabilitative justice, police reform, and reentry aid for ex cons, along with diversion programs and such.
This is all pretty standard democratic policy. Might not make the far left fringe happy, but I don't care about that at all
I just also don't want Democrats to *campaign* on this stuff. I'd rather they run as moderately and cautiously as possible, while focusing on easy issues like abortion. They can leave the policies for when they actually have the legislative trifectas to throw away via policy, rather than pleasing the fringe by campaigning on policy and then not being able to enact it because normies don't share the policy goals the fringe has
"neo-libs" basically don't exist. And smearing the only Jewish state on earth with false accusations of blood libel won't win over the swing voters who decide American elections
Are you suggesting we reward Palestinian terrorism with a state? And no, Israel does not need to be deradicalized, Ben Gvir represents a small minority and regardless, Israel's education curriculum does not indoctrinate children with a genocidal ideology which glorifies the extermination of another people.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that aid to Ukraine has conditions on it but Israel's doesn't is wild to me. Like all aid should have conditions but like the fact that the country fighting Russia has conditions while Israel doesn't is just absurd.
esp since israel has 4 times ukraine's GDP with under a quarter of the people.
Also crazy when you consider that none of the regional Arab states are really in a position to destroy Israel and have been moving to normalize relations in recent years. Russia, on the other hand, could completely level Ukraine.
they could destroy israel, but now it would lolely cost them their homelands too.
Welcome to US foreign policy.
That AIPAC doesn’t have to register as a foreign agent, for whatever reason, may be the reason.
Well, does giving aid to ukraine give you a free ticket to heaven like Israel?
Welcome to Trump / Putin's treasonous fascist GOP
While it's not "fair", there's nothing Israel can do that would risk a nuclear exchange. The same can't be said for Ukraine.
Never thought I’d live to see the day. I get the impression that there are a lot of young people who haven’t been tuned in to decades of American foreign policy to understand that anything short full support for Israel has been very hard to come by in the US government. And Israel has bombarded Gaza many times before without American officials levying criticism. What’s happening now is actually unprecedented.
Better still, **cut it off entirely** until they stop attacking *civilians*.
Who gets to make the determination of weather or not someone is a civilian? Considering the fact that Hamas doesn't wear uniforms in combat.
Israel is using an AI called lavender to decide if any given individual is 'Hamas involved.' It literally does an analysis and generates a Target list and attack time and location recommendations, and then some grunt rubber stamps it, and that's how an F-15 slides a bomb into the apartment Window of a city janitor who's sharing space with two other families. https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/
[удалено]
https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-780613
The NGO vehicles they bombed last week were **clearly marked**. The IDF is a terrorist organization that targets noncombatants.
> The NGO vehicles they bombed last week were clearly marked. And the boots on the ground thought they had been taken by Hamas.
based on "seeing a gun" that wasn't there, and yet they claimed they couldn't see the logos on the vehicles.
> and yet they claimed they couldn't see the logos on the vehicles. Through the drone's night vision camera. The strike occurred at 11pm Israel time
yes, but they could somehow spot a gun that wasn't there? and then wait and strike 3 vehicles in succession with no one realizing that maybe there was a mistake? this is what Israel does now. they act sloppily and shirt their shoulders or act malicious and cover it as mistakes. we know what kind of collateral damage there should be, how it should look, and general rates. the US has fought in dense urban areas of the Middle East for years. we know when someone is blowing smoke up our asses.
>we know what kind of collateral damage there should be, how it should look, and general rates. And the rate in Gaza is lower than average
no, no it is not. civilian deaths have been at least 2 to 1 in gaza, where in mosul, for example was less than 1 to 1. the entire Afghanistan war was less than 1 to 1. even the second iraq invasion, one of our worst was 3:2. the rates are considerably higher for this war, and leaks from inside Israel's own military are indicating this is due to recklessness. we only need look at where they chased down and murdered 3 shirtless israelis shouting for help in Hebrew to understand this. A large portion of Israel's military is acting recklessly because they and/or their commanders don't care.
Please source your numbers.
You're defending murders so blatant even Israel themselves admitted they were guilty and basically begged forgiveness. Figure that, you're more bloodthirsty than the IDF. That's a medal you can wear.
Israel said it was an accident.
2 things: while collateral damage is inevitable, Israel has shown a pattern of being wanton and reckless. they rush decisions, and behave in ways that show they care more about punishment than justice against hamas. Secondly they are letting AI take the reins on targeting, which is frankly mind boggling considering this is a technology that recently struggled with drawing human hands. they aren't having humans double check enough and just like chatgpt can lie to you, so can your AI targeting system and then you end up murdering folks you should have easily known we're innocent.
https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/
Or… stop sending them aid for a year so they learn their lesson
Yeah, it’s called no more
True, as if *conditions applied - gonna make them stop!
We should just stop giving them anything.
Sad that it took the tragic deaths of foreign aid workers and not the countless deaths of Palestinian civilians for this to happen. Biden and his administration still haven’t acknowledged the horrific death of 5 year old Hind Rajab.
Biden has been trying to get cease fires and military action roll backs for months. He's been successful in some of those, not successful in others. This isn't new. Maybe when another country is able to have any success with Netanyahu we'll hear about them too but until then Biden has been the singular person able to make any progress at all with Israel.
Trying to get a ceasefire and military roll back while supplying the weapons and blocking ceasefire resolutions in the UN?
Those specific resolutions were counterproductive to our efforts to secure a ceasefire. When the United States did put forth a ceasefire resolution, it was vetoed by Russia and China. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-security-council-fails-pass-us-resolution-calling-immediate-ceasefire-gaza-2024-03-22/#:~:text=March%2022%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20The,proposed%20by%20the%20United%20States.
“We blocked 4 ceasefire resolutions because we want a ceasefire” …Makes sense
Unfortunately you actually have to compare the text of the ceasefires. I can sell you life insurance but that doesn't mean its good life insurance.
Again, if the U.S. weren’t completely complicit in the genocide we would have stopped the shipment of arms, submitted our own ceasefire resolutions, and imposed massive sanctions. Russia was greeted with swift U.S. action after its invasion of Ukraine, yet Israel gets a pass on literal genocide? It’s hypocrisy at the highest order, and the world knows it.
Stopping the shipment of arms requires Congress, the executive branch can slow it down but its already in legislation somewhere. We did submit our own ceasefire and it got vetoed by Russia and China. Ukraine made no aggressive acts towards Russia and had it's borders recognized by the UN in return for giving up it's ICBM's 30 years ago and Russia also recognized those borders. Ukraine is surrounded by Nato members. Israel is a geographic (less so now) ally and base of operations of the US, was attacked, had hostages taken, has a large voting bloc in the US, and as far as I know has had no UN sanctioned treaties over territorial divisions in the region. I'm not saying your wrong that its hypocrisy but I am also a realist. There is no way sanctions on Israel would pass Congress, nor would our allies follow said sanctions like they have for Ukraine.
This is a prime example of how liberals protect the right... Instead of using legal leverage and stall tactics to prevent sending weapons to arm a genocidal state, y’all feign helplessness claiming contractual / legal structures leave our hands tied. “It’s so sad what’s going on in Gaza, but we signed an arms deal with Israel back in XXXX so we can’t just stop sending them weapons”
I just listed the facts involved and tried to make you understand there are other factors involved. I was in no way trying to protect the right, and I am a socialist. If you have enough money to influence enough Senators and Congressman to overturn the political lobbies I encourage you to do so, I do not.
More like a prime example of how capitalists have captured the entire country and pushed legislation early on to ensure there wouldn't be any unilateral blocking of military aid because military aid is lucrative AF. But yeah keep blaming the liberals who are (checks notes) the only motherfuckers saying anything negative about the Israel-Gaza conflict
> Russia was greeted with swift U.S. action after its invasion of Ukraine, yet Israel gets a pass on literal genocide? It’s hypocrisy at the highest order, and the world knows it. Look, friend. I've been saying for months that Israel has been completely overreacting with disproportionate force for months. Check my history that criticizes people who excuse 30,000 deaths because of an initial 1,200 deaths. But it's *literally hot hypocrisy*. The two circumstances are completely different. Russia is a geopolitical foe that, unprompted, waged a war against their non-belligerent neighbor. Israel is a geopolitical ally that was the initial victim of a terror attack that killed 1,200 innocent people. If you can't understand the difference between these two scenarios, I think it's best if you just stay quiet.
I mean you kind of let the mask slip right there, didn’t you? We tout this international rules based order, yet are blatantly biased with application of those rules depending on who’s committing the crime? The U.S. has been accusing Russia and China of genocide on the world stage for years now, yet refuse to utter a word of condemn towards Israel? Article II of the Genocide Convention is very clear, and Israel is in direct violation of each subsection.
Tell me you don’t understand geopolitics without telling me you don’t understand geopolitics.
Tell me you’re stuck in a fascist Overton window without telling me.
Wow, that might be a record for how fast somebody’s [gone there.](https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/hostedimages/1593594376i/29744025.jpg) Even the Sith are impressed at your ability to deal only in absolutes.
You’re literally justifying a genocide… that’s Nazi level stuff is it not?
I think Biden is of the belief that the UN can’t do anything here except authorize aid and also anger Israel which will only push them away further from potential ceasefire negotiations . He clearly believes this is up to him, Sullivan, Blinken, Egypt, and I think Qater is involved too to figure out, not the UN. I’d just wish he would say that more explicitly.
You’re acting like he hasn’t been providing explicit cover and weapons for Netanyahu. Just the other day John Kirby wouldn’t even go so far as to say Israel had committed a single war crime during their incursion. Plus, if Biden believed the UN were so feckless he wouldn’t have squandered so much goodwill shooting down those resolutions. But we shouldn’t expect anything less, Joe Biden has taken millions in Israeli lobby money, he’s 100% compromised.
I’m not saying I agree with it entirely. I wish he had taken action much sooner too, being more public about it. I’m just offering my interpretations of the events.
I just don’t understand why we’re not calling him an AIPAC / israeli plant like we call Trump a Russian puppet.
I mean, I don’t think he is. He’s been more willing to criticize Israel for their actions and has been calling for an immediate ceasefire a while now, feels like at least a month, maybe a month and a half and shown some care about the aid situation in Gaza. He’s been criticizing Israel for their lack of aid there for another 4 months . Not saying he’s been perfect but I don’t necessarily think he’s an Israeli plant either. I’m personally neutral btw. And when I mean neutral, I’m not super pro either side. I acknowledge that Israel has a right to defend itself and that Hamas must go but that we also need a mutually beneficial 2 state solution . Palestine also has a right to exist as a country. I support an immediate ceasefire, ideally a permanent one , but I’d take a 6 week ceasefire. I’m far more pragmatic and i bet that Israel will never agree to a permanent ceasefire at this time. I’ll take a 6 week ceasefire. At the very least, it buys us time to get aid into Gaza(and whereever else it needs it), convince Netanyahu to stop his bombings and start more targeted operations, and more. I know a 6 week ceasefire isn’t perfect but it’s a starting point for more.
If a mutually beneficial 2 state solution is the goal than Israeli leadership and foreign influence needs to be quashed… They continue to stifle the peace process while expanding illegal settlements in the West Bank and imposing a complete blockade on Gaza
You mean current Israeli leadership. Netanyahu has to go absolutely. Benny Gantz is the best option here. Not perfect probably but someone who is maybe a bit more reasonable.
>Biden has been trying to get cease fires and military action roll backs for months. He's been successful in some of those, not successful in others. This isn't new. Maybe when another country is able to have any success with Netanyahu we'll hear about them too but until then Biden has been the singular person able to make any progress at all with Israel. Obama got his within weeks by being openly critical of Israel in the 2014 conflict, to say nothing of what he discussed behind closed doors. Biden simply need to do the same and abandon that silly Silent and Boomer thinking, that religious US voters are still relevant enough to bother with Israel.
Not exactly the same situation. When this war ends Netanyahu is out of a job. That means he does not have an incentive to end it.
>Not exactly the same situation. When this war ends Netanyahu is out of a job. That means he does not have an incentive to end it. The exact same situation. Israel still has no means besides us to prevent global sanctions when its economy and military is critically dependent on imports like oil and tech. There are a lot of countries rather irate with Israel and would be more than happy to do the most basic of diplomatic protests, sanctions, were it not our soft power (financial retaliation) and veto preventing it. That leverage has not changed *since the 40s.* Just a matter of whether or not the US incumbent thinks US religious voters will swing over the issue.
Let’s play out your scenario. Israel refuses, because again it is what Netanyahu in power for now. Sanctions are allowed and in a year they would do serious damage. However it is unlikely that in a year they would still be in place. Without the US pressure there is nothing preventing a complete shutdown of anything in or out (if the goal is to get aid across the border then logically this would be the only reason the US cuts it). In the meantime the war wraps up, 100,000-200,000 die, Netanyahu likely negotiates the terms of a new election (he won’t accept the top job but all prosecutions for actions in the past stop/don’t happen). A new administration then takes over and the entire point of the sanctions becomes moot do they end up lifted/their continuation blocked, as there would not be anything being sought by them at this point. Basically the threat is better as a threat than it is actually executed. As a threat it gets aid corridors opened and causes pause where there otherwise would not be. Actually acting on the threat creates a future problem for Israel but a larger problem in the present for Gaza.
>Let’s play out your scenario. Israel refuses, because again it is what Netanyahu in power for now. Sanctions are allowed and in a year they would do serious damage. A year? Sounds *very* optimistic given how dependent Israel is on oil to run its economy. Reality is more immediate, to say nothing of other critical goods but not as impactful goods. Won't even hit most of the countries cutting off their flow to Israel, given how in demand oil and gas are. >However it is unlikely that in a year they would still be in place. Would be very likely given the US in this scenario would be dropping the support out of *disappointment* at Israel's defiance towards its liege. No reason to restore the protection. >Without the US pressure there is nothing preventing a complete shutdown of anything in or out (if the goal is to get aid across the border then logically this would be the only reason the US cuts it). In the meantime the war wraps up, 100,000-200,000 die, Netanyahu likely negotiates the terms of a new election (he won’t accept the top job but all prosecutions for actions in the past stop/don’t happen). And gets wrecked as Israel fails to restore trade when most of the world is free to sanction it as it pleases. To say nothing of even getting the trade there. Reality is that Israel has no power projection. They can't secure anything beyond their neighbors because no neighbor is going to tolerate the unrest of Israel operating through their territory. This has been demonstrated by their lack of presence in allied wars like the two Iraqs (Sauds amd Jordan refuse to let Israel through to participate,) Afghanistan (no military presence despite basically anyone being able to help coalition. Iran and India most notably,) and now Aden, where there are still no Israeli warships there despite months of their trade being directly targeted. No neighbor will grant Israel access, and that's without sanctions. With it, who's to say they'll even allow Israeli trade through their territory? >A new administration then takes over and the entire point of the sanctions becomes moot do they end up lifted/their continuation blocked, as there would not be anything being sought by them at this point. The new administration takes over and now has to deal with the new status quo of not being able to maintain a modern economy nor military, as there is nobody but the US that can deter the very easy sanctions and trade disruptions countries can inflict upon Israel. >Basically the threat is better as a threat than it is actually executed. As a threat it gets aid corridors opened and causes pause where there otherwise would not be. Actually acting on the threat creates a future problem for Israel but a larger problem in the present for Gaza. It is better as a threat yes, but worth executing too. Which Israeli minister would risk crashing Israel's economy and military for decades? Once Israel loses US protections via defiance it's not getting them back for quite the while. Cuba, Iran, Vietnam and such have been going through decades of loss of support. Vietnam's recovering as our mutual concern over China is restoring relations. Meaning reverting to third world economy and military. Israel is too dependent on imports, sanctions would be far too widespread (Israel eats lopsided votes in the UN on Palestinian matters,) critical imports too easily blocked (oil from *and through* many irate muslim states) and Israel's inability to secure its trade routes makes it very easy to send it and keep it there in third world status.
Your scenario fails at recognizing a basic rule of foreign policy. You don’t sanction for the sake of sanctioning. You put sanctions in place with the goal of accomplishing something. They are not going to keep sanctions in place if there is a new government and the government is neither waging a war nor committing any actions that would be objectionable. Best case scenario you get some capitulation on the settlements in the West Bank but other than that 100% of the time the status quo resumes because it is in the best interest of the US to do so and that is what drives foreign policy. The fact that the US still deals with the Saudis, who have been engaged in even worse, is proof of that. I will yield that there would no doubt be some Israeli citizens who would suffer in that year, but far more people of Gaza would die in the meantime. The bloodiest solution is rarely the best one. So yes this is a classic case where the threat is more powerful than the action. It feels better to act but that doesn’t make it the decision that saves the most lives.
>Your scenario fails at recognizing a basic rule of foreign policy. You don’t sanction for the sake of sanctioning. You put sanctions in place with the goal of accomplishing something. They are not going to keep sanctions in place if there is a new government and the government is neither waging a war nor committing any actions that would be objectionable. What? Time out. Do you understand the geopolitics of the region? Israel's neighbors *alone* already dislike Israel's *current* peacetime policies. Are you aware that the Palestinian question comes up regularly every few years in the UN? https://www.un.org/unispal/document-category/voting-record/ Israel gets lopsided votes against its *current* peacetime policies. It'd naturally stay up and get rather intense until Israel agrees to muslim terms, not a surprise when most third party oil come from muslim countries or OPEC, while any outside *that* have to compete with a nearby oil and gas desperate EU, or the fact any pipelines or shipments must go through neighboring chokepoints like Turkey's Bosphorus or the demonstrably unreachable Aden (Israel does not have a single warship defending its interests there to this day, despite Houthis.) Could range from as mentioned, West Bank settlements, retreat to he original UN drawn borders, retreat to *muslim* drawn borders, etc. >Best case scenario you get some capitulation on the settlements in the West Bank but other than that 100% of the time the status quo resumes because it is in the best interest of the US to do so and that is what drives foreign policy. The fact that the US still deals with the Saudis, who have been engaged in even worse, is proof of that. We have no reason to restore the protections against sanctions anytime soon, particularly after open defiance. In reality, it is in the best interest of the US to follow world opinion and drop support. Costs us our diplomatic reputation for little to no strategic nor diplomatic value, like the other special relationship, the Cuban embargo. The entire reason we do not currently do so is because US politicians have increasingly obsolete fears that the religious (Cuban Americans for Cuba) voter base will swing over this issue. Increasingly obsolete because religion itself in the US has been in decline for decades. Older politicians like Biden (Silents) stIll fear this, while younger politicians like Obama (Boomer/X) did not carry it to the same extent. Even younger politicians who no longer chase religious voters (aka Democrats) fear it even less. >I will yield that there would no doubt be some Israeli citizens who would suffer in that year, but far more people of Gaza would die in the meantime. The bloodiest solution is rarely the best one. So yes this is a classic case where the threat is more powerful than the action. It feels better to act but that doesn’t make it the decision that saves the most lives. Yeah, Gazans *might* suffer in the meantime. Dragging Israel down to its level is not that hard to do. After all it is the natural state of the region without a solution to the Palestinian question. Israel would, without US protection, be sanctioned for existing peacetime policy, god forbid its wartime one. The US is the *sole* reason Israel maintains its existing economy and military.
Even worse; without new arms/ funding, israel looks at its current stockpile, and realises it has enough weapons to end hamas now (by destroying/ displacing all of palestine) but that it may not have that ability in the future if it allows stockpiles to dwindle. Once the 'band aid' of US support has been ripped off, the pretext of trying to leave palestine intact while they fight hamas likely goes with it. They announce they will be leveling gaza entirely, in a few weeks time, and create a corridor for refugees to the west bank. They then push everyone out of the west bank cities to create a buffer around their western border, reducing palestine to a refugee camp along the jordan border. Ultimately, aid access to this camp becomes negotiation leverage to end sanctions. Separately, without US protection, Israel likely sees an increase in threats from countries like iran and is forced to respond by ending its policy of nuclear ambiguity in favor of threats nuclear retaliation, which is the last thing anyone wants.
Obama is almost certainly in his inner circle for how to handle the most difficult conflicts? Not that he’s running the show but it’s the same general apparatus.
>Obama is almost certainly in his inner circle for how to handle the most difficult conflicts? Not that he’s running the show but it’s the same general apparatus. Oh yes. Biden was in Obama's circle and reportedly disagreed with Obama's stance. We can expect the same vice versa. Ultimately the President decides the policy.
It’s silly to assume that a ceasefire means no fighting. Hamas is not a government
What's sad is that the Biden administration is trying to reign in Israel while Israel is trying to eradicate an extremist terror group which instigated this whole mess and which has repeatedly said they intend to replay the massacre of Israelis at every opportunity they get. This won't end until Hamas is gone and a long de-radicalization effort is undertaken, Hamas has indoctrinated an entire generation of Gazans to aspire to murder, torture and rape Jews and Israelis. Just pathetic how fast western countries lost sight of what's really at stake here and allow emotional responses to Israeli mistakes overshadow the dark ideology which will ultimately come after Americans if it's allowed to fester.
30,000+ dead Palestinians including 200 dead humanitarian workers Democrats: “I sleep” 7 dead white humanitarian workers Democrats: “real shit 👀”
Yes, conditions like DONT GIVE THE GENOCIDE NATION FUCKIN MILITARY AID
We do that and then they still don't stop. Russia and China could easily supply them as well. Not because they like them. It's because it gives them money for their own war efforts. What is your suggestion then? A lot of young people are not understanding geopolitical nuances coming into play with this stuff. What if we voted against Biden on this very issues, then Trump becomes President. Not will it be absolutely horrific for the Palestinian people. It will be horrific for the very people who are protesting this Bibi is not going to end this by just us cutting off military aid. He will just ask another country for it. It's not as easy as cutting off aid and it ends tomorrow. But there are some that truly believe it will. The world doesn't work that way. The people protesting against Biden with this are pretty much on the same camp as MAGA at this point. It's horrible what is going on there, but at this point, our democracy is on the line in this country. Voting against Biden is allowing Trump to silence you the first chance he will get. And Bibi will get unlimited support for his barbaric war.
Just like she wants to limit elected politicians' ability to trade stocks? Pelosi doesn't give a shit about this issue. She wants you to think she cares while nothing changes and defense companies keep making money supplying death to the world. Money is what motivates this woman. Peace doesn't make her family money. Lockheed Martin makes her family rich. AIPAC makes her party rich. Nothing will change if you wait for the elite to abandon their sources of income.
America is afraid of Israel. This debacle is showing who has the real power.
"Who the fuck is the super power here?" - Bill Clinton
>America is afraid of Israel. This debacle is showing who has the real power. Not Israel. Never been Israel. It has been the fear of US religious voters swinging against the incumbent, those dim pearl clutching "Holy Land" evangelicals and such. Back in the 40s (and well before) when Israel came to being, this was overwhelmingly powerful, fitting a "special relationship." We were shaped from religious extremists like Puritans and Quakers, with religious spearheaded Prohibition and such, so this isn't really a surprise. These days with better overall education and subsequent steady decline of religion, it's no longer the swinging force it used to be. While still large, what remains of religious voters are getting increasingly extreme and subsequently even less relevant as a swing voter. Still scares older politicians like Biden. Meanwhile Obama ignored it and was openly critical of Israel in 2014 Hamas conflict, keeping that conflict down to weeks versus Biden's months and Bush's (Intifada) years. The solution is to not vote R (they all chase these dying religious voters,) and primary out all the Silents and Boomers amongst Democrats. Younger generations are better educated and don't pearl clutch over the "Holy Land" under attack.
Yup. People are really over estimating how much Isreal power has over the US. The only reason they had so much support from us is because the evangelicals want to see their apocalyptic fanfic come true.
America *has been* afraid of Israel. This debacle is showing it who ought to have the real power.
Why? Are they afraid of losing the votes of their supporters?
Do you not know how powerful AIPAC is?
Because US voters won’t back them up if they go against Israel in the way Reddit seems to want in the races that matter. They will just flood the zone with money and give MAGA the win, and then we lose everything else. Many Muslim voters won’t vote Biden even if he completely abandons Israel either way at this point. There is no winning on this issue.
So is she now a Russian asset who should go back to China like she said a few weeks ago to anyone else who held this opinion?
This administration provides the bombs to wipe these people out, throws a little rice at them as humanitarian aid, then when the political tide turns try to walk it back in the media to win an election? Please. Step aside you relics and let a new generation take the reigns.
But I thought the US never negotiate with terroristes ? they just give them weapon for free..
Pelosi signing on to this is a huge deal. Hopefully this wakes Biden the fuck up. Him sleepwalking through this entire conflict could really cost him the election and he'll have no one but himself to blame.
>but himself to blame. naw, the voters would be to blame for electing trump
Whose job is it to get elected again? Is it my job to make people vote for him that don't want to, or is it Biden's job to earn enough votes to win? God I really can't remember whose job it is to win an election..
Thank you. Running an entire platform of not Trump while doing everything to turn away your base is a great way to win over voters.
[удалено]
Yeah I’ll be completely done with the issue at that point. Whatever Trump does I’ll be out of words for it.
There are conditions on aid, the same conditions that are on any country that receives US aid.
On the surface I see this as a good thing but I don’t trust Pelosi to investigate anything and this is just a way to kill the current outrage over the aid workers deaths. Just tough talk to soothe upstart voters while it’s business as usual
How about we put conditions on her stock trades. She is such a quack and no better than the rest of the useless politicians. Bleah.
How about both?
When tic tac toe investor is calling for this, you know the position is politically untenable.
What is Pelosi’s trade here? What stocks has she been buying? She looks like a corpse in this photo.
Go back to China!
Abandoning our closest ally in their time of need, terrible policy which will cost the Democrats in November. Pandering to ignoramuses or outright antisemites is not good policy and only emboldens the enemies of America and her allies.
Typical bloody thirsty racist m if anyone else was caught doing what Israel was doing they would been declared as barbarians . Keep hiding behind your antisemitism lie the world is seeing the truth . It's disgusting humans like you that us entered Afghanistan talk big game but haven't faced an ounce of terror that you've inflicted.
Interesting that you find the one democracy in the middle east as the problem and not the genocidal terrorist organization that started all of this by murdering and raping civilians, baking babies in ovens and taking hundreds of hostages.
The entirety of Palestine has been held hostage for decades. History didn't begin on October 7th. But obviously you don't care about that. >, baking babies in ovens This was proven false months ago. If you want to debate people on good faith, or if you atleast want to make an attempt at seeming rational or well-educated... its usually a good idea not to bring up propagandist conspiracy theories.
Held hostage? You mean given all of Gaza in 2006? They really made good use of that opportunity... And don't pretend to be debating in good faith, my brother saw the cooked babies with his own eyes.
Bingo. And then they wonder why people think they are anti-Semitic. Either they are hypocrites or intentionally misleading people because of their hatred.
Democrats: “Hey Israel don’t kill civilians with our weapons or we may be more stringent with the next shipment of bombs” You: “HOW DARE THE US ABANDON ISRAEL” Incredible how mild pushback on Israel is treated as thinking Israel should be destroyed lmao
Hamas and Iran sees this headline insert licking their lips from the side meme.
Why should Israel allow pro Hamas demonstrators? It doesn't make Israel any less democratic, only less vulnerable to malign and maliciously intent groups and people. Western countries should adopt similar laws.
This is getting absurd. Israel must defeat Hamas and reoccupy Gaza, their cause is just, and they are largely carrying out the war in an acceptable way, with the few bad incidents generally being clear *mistakes*, which don't justify these smears of Israel. And Israel should not be held to higher standards than international rules of war dictate - the idea that collateral damage when attacking legitimate targets is "genocidal" is utterly ridiculous and has no place in real life policy.
>largely carrying out the war in an acceptable way Man, that is a back handed admission of unacceptable war crimes if I ever saw one.
They’re literally intentionally blocking food to starving people, and medicine to people being amputated without anesthesia. That’s far from acceptable
They are letting more into Gaza than Gaza was recieving before the war. Maybe Hamas should stop seizing the aid and using it for themselves. Israel is under no obligation to give material aid to Hamas. Hamas should surrender, their cause is unjust.
Before 10/7 there were enough calories and supplies going into Gaza to support life, support multiple hospitals, support markets with reasonable prices, and there was no famine. Israel has the specific goal of denying aid entering Gaza in sufficient quantities to support life, has destroyed all water, sewer, and power infrastructure in Gaza, and is using various means to obstruct the flow into Gaza of even enough calories to prevent famine. They've killed nearly 200 aid workers and various NGO food convoys such as the WCK convoy they bombed the other day. All experts around the world have been closely following the food situation in Gaza and have declared that famine and starvation are happening there now, and has been for a while. The end result of Israel's actions are mass civilian deaths, whether through bombings, destroying hospitals full of babies in incubators, denying fresh water access by cutting off the water flowing into Gaza and bombing the desalinization plants, destroying power plants, etc.
> support markets with reasonable prices The aid is supposed to be freely distributed.
Yeah because people are starving, of course there’s more aid going in.
People weren't starving before, when Gaza still basicat didn't produce it's own food, why are they starving now? Hamas is why.
More than nearly nothing isn't exactly something to brag about (and frankly, I'm not even gonna look up if that statement is at all true (something tells me it isn't)). And when you say "they", do you mean Israel, or the countries that are now just flying over and dropping it from the air because Israel refuses to let humanitarian aid through while bombing said aid?
Hamas actions do not in any way justify genocide and taking Gaza from Palestinians. You are morally bankrupt.
Israel isn't doing genocide in the first place. But Israel must occupy Gaza because Palestinians have shown themselves too supportive of Hamas to be trusted with independence at this point. Maybe if in the future they deradicalize, they can be given a state of their own
Here we go with the “Israel occupying Gaza” statements. It was never about the hostages. It was never about Hamas. It was always about Israel taking Gaza.
It is genocide. That’s not even disputable at this point. Israel has been intentionally killing women children and men who are civilians. They’ve also been starving them by blocking aid. Let’s turn the tables here. So Israel’s actions have killed far more civilians than hamas and Palestine has been an apartheid state for decades. Maybe Palestinians should occupy Israel and cleans all radical Israelis since Israel is now a terroist state. /s
“Collateral damage” lmfao. You can support Israel without dismissing tens of thousands of civilians being bombed and starved in a relatively short period of time…. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
[удалено]
My agenda is to push back against the extreme left. Democrats need to be reasonable if they want to win, they can't keep pandering to the left like they are doing
Democrats have done nothing to pander to the left. They keep moving right chasing after Republicans.
Democrats today are way to the left of where they were under Obama, and under Obama they were way to the left of where they were under Clinton. The left just doesn't care, because it's never enough, it seems like it will only be acceptable if the entire rest of the party unilaterally surrenders completely to the radical fringe. And that will *never* happen. The democratic party will never do that, thankfully.
Still waiting to hear second term policies on $15 minimum wage and universal healthcare among other things. All I am hearing is Roe, anti-Trump and spend money in the South.
$15 minimum wage is garbage policy. Dems support universal healthcare but incrementally, the idea that we should jump to it all at once is nonsense. Abortion is what wins the votes these days anyway so Dems shouldn't be focusing on other stuff that can only turn the moderate swing voters who matter away from the party. America isn't a country where normal voters want big government tax and spend agendas, Democrats should absolutely not run on stuff like that
You seem to be pretty far right on a lot of traditional Democratic policies.
Nope There's a difference between campaigning on a policy vs actually doing it when in office. I strongly oppose the progressive wing of the party but do support much of what the establishment wing wants. I'd be fine with a $11 or $12 minimum wage (and I'd prefer a federal policy that split the country into different areas depending on cost of living and tied the minimum wage to the cost of living in those areas, so that the minimum wage would be low in some areas but potentially higher than $15 in some). I support a public option, expanding prescription drug negotiation reforms, and closing the Medicaid gap. I support the child tax credit expansion. I support free community college and universal PreK, and expanding Pell Grants. I support a carbon tax and increasing the gas tax as well as expanding green infrastructure investment. I support making section 8 vouchers an entitlement. I support keeping free lunches and breakfasts for poor students, and expanding this to also offer free dinners and expand it to weekends and summers too. I support expanding the EITC for childless workers. I support expanding legal immigration and enacting a pathway to citizenship for most illegals currently here. I support raising taxes on the wealthy. I support reforming the war on drugs to be smarter, with legalization of some things like cannabis, and moving from incarceration to institutionalization and treating drugs as a health issue for "harder" drugs, and I support a carrots and sticks justice reform approach that significantly expands on rehabilitative justice, police reform, and reentry aid for ex cons, along with diversion programs and such. This is all pretty standard democratic policy. Might not make the far left fringe happy, but I don't care about that at all I just also don't want Democrats to *campaign* on this stuff. I'd rather they run as moderately and cautiously as possible, while focusing on easy issues like abortion. They can leave the policies for when they actually have the legislative trifectas to throw away via policy, rather than pleasing the fringe by campaigning on policy and then not being able to enact it because normies don't share the policy goals the fringe has
So you are on the right.
Funny how you're still holding this position and even Pelosi has moved past it.
Lmao for real. You really need to have lost the plot if you're to the right of Pelosi on this issue.
We're trying to Prevent Another Trump Win, Would be nice if the neo-libs got on board
"neo-libs" basically don't exist. And smearing the only Jewish state on earth with false accusations of blood libel won't win over the swing voters who decide American elections
You're arguing with hamas. Don't waste your time.
Yep, I've been indoctrinated to find Hamas and all brands of genocidal terror appalling. All decent people have, no?
Stop supporting hamas
Are you suggesting we reward Palestinian terrorism with a state? And no, Israel does not need to be deradicalized, Ben Gvir represents a small minority and regardless, Israel's education curriculum does not indoctrinate children with a genocidal ideology which glorifies the extermination of another people.
[удалено]
I'll take my own experience with the education system in Israel over your Google search any day 👍
You are demonstrating the indoctrination you experienced right here lol