605

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.crimedad.work/post/138601

“That son of a bitch, Bibi Netanyahu, he’s a bad guy,” said Biden privately, according to Woodward. “He’s a bad fucking guy!”

Reads like a bloody Onion article.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 152 points 1 month ago

Maybe stop sending them billions in weapons then, eh?

[-] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 48 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

In an election year? That's political suicide in the US to Harris by proxy, given how many people are brainwashed over there.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The majority of Americans are opposed to sending weapons to Israel. Even the majority of Republicans.

Supporting Israel for political gain is a vastly overstated argument. It exists to justify sending weapons to Israel.

It is very similar to the previous claim that Biden should not have been replaced because he was the incumbent.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

He had the chance to legitimize the option. They have the evidence, and they have the laws. He treated both of those like chopped liver and that was that. He's locked in now.

[-] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 10 points 1 month ago

Drag thinks giving guns to murderers is the political suicide.

[-] sirboozebum@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

In America, it is.

[-] Crikeste@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

They didn’t stop to think: what if people don’t want to vote for genocide? Oh well, we won’t give them that option because genocide is an American value. See: native Americans.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It’s so simple, even a random person on the internet with no knowledge of how any of it actually works has figured it all out!

Yeah! Just… break a decades-long agreement. There no nuance to this at all! No complications…

amirite?

There can’t possibly be any penalties or repercussions for that! I mean. A random internet citizen said to do it- so……

Easy peezy!

[-] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 36 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So we throw away the “rules based international order” and return to the pre-1914 unilateral rules and all the brutal wars that bought? So much better, amirite? Might makes right, and we’ve got the might ~~for now~~!

The US stance on Israeli leadership is decimating our ability to wield soft power influence. We are global hypocrites blocking ANY action, whilst expecting the world to fall in line to support Ukraine against Russian revanchism - even NATO members dissent from the US position. The global south is turning to China/OPEC+ trading blocs. They already tried to break the petrodollar, which would be a huge blow if successful.

Even taking a realpolitik approach, without soft power all those US military bases used for ‘power projection’ lose their local consent, and become occupation sites inside non-allied nations. The Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan is a chill spot for launching COIN drone missions - whereas the Conoco base in Syria is constantly under drone and rocket attack.

Supporting Bibi’s wars of aggression is a stupid play on multiple levels.

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I never said it was good to support it (though I’m sure that won’t stop people from reporting me for being a genocide apologist). Only that it’s a very complicated and nuanced thing to just assume it should be easy to simply stop because we want it to.

Nothing would make me happier than to see the issue resolved and for people to stop being hurt. But that’s not for me to decide. With a vote or otherwise.

And that’s because it’s a very complicated agreement. Nations don’t just decide to break them. Regardless of your strong opinions on the matter.

[-] Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee 20 points 1 month ago

Maybe stop sending them billions in weapons then, eh?

I see at least three actions in that statement:

  1. Stop giving them billions in free weapons
  2. Stop giving them any weapons
  3. Stop them

#1 should have happened a long time ago imo, if not used as a leverage to prevent an Israeli ground invasion of ~~Rafah~~, ~~the West Bank~~, ~~Lebanon~~, striking enrichment at Natanz. “Free bombs for crimes against humanity” is a bad moral play, bad politics, and bad diplomacy outside the US:Israel sphere.

#2 Is politically hard normally, impossible in an election cycle. I hate it, but here we are in the house we built. Make FEC the only campaign funds - it’s OUR government, not the highest bidder’s.

#3 The US’s geopolitical track record shows that we’ll tolerate some awful, terrible people if they’ll get ‘on our side’ even if there’s a trend of massive and foreseeable blowback, the diplomatic corps don’t learn lessons.

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

And my point is:

  1. It’s more complicated than that
  2. It’s more complicated than that
  3. it’s more complicated than that.

What I’m trying to say is that none of us are experts on the subject. And those that are suggest that, guess what?

Yeah. It’s more complicated than that.

And I chose to believe the experts on the matter. But when they’re ready to argue music theory, I’ll eat their lunch. 😀

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

If the “experts” told you that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, would you believe them?

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] revolutionaryvole@lemmy.world 31 points 1 month ago

The US military-industrial complex does not need you to defend it.

It might well be more complex than that, but you have every right to demand from your government to put its vast resources to use in order to tackle that complexity. Given the severity of the situation, I'd say you have a responsibility to.

Seeing such a tragedy unfold and going 'oh, my government probably has a good reason to keep funding the active genocide, I'd hate to give some extra paperwork to our bureaucrats by making a fuss!' is very defeatist, to put it politely.

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Demand as much you’d like. It’s a right to do so. However the problem is, we have assholes that are withholding their vote because their unreasonable demands aren’t being met. And yes, expecting a nation to simply just… end an agreement is unreasonable.

Because again- it’s NUANCED AND COMPLICATED.

And therein is the problem.

I’d love for just ONE of these people demanding we stop sending weapons to Israel to lay out a plan on exactly how to go about it. Because I’d love to see that! I’d LOVE to see it happen, because I HATE that it’s happening to begin with.

I’m sure the pentagon, the White House and even Palestine would love to see that as well.

But no. That won’t happen. Because it’s so much easier to just demand a thing you don’t understand, than it is to accept that what you demand is unreasonable in the context of what actually needs to happen for it to work.

And therein lies my point.

We ALL want that shit to stop. ALL of us. It’s a no brainer to want to end the supply of weapons to those that use them to harm innocent people. But saying “Look at me! I want the US to stop supplying arms to Israel! I’m a good guy! Give me internet points!” Isn’t helping anyone. I could do that shit all day. It doesn’t change anything.

Provide a seamless and workable plan to end the supply or stop assuming it’s that easy. Because it’s easy to say a thing should be done.

It’s MUCH harder to actually do it.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Its really not that hard, the US just has to lay demands down to Israel and follow through with them. You stop making things worse by doing X by Y date, if you dont we stop providing you one type of weapon you need least. If you dont do it by Z date you lose something more important. Repeat until they realise you're not bluffing.

The problem isn't that its beyond the wit of man for the US to figure out how to use its immense leveage over Israel, its that it chooses not to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] XaiwahBlue 14 points 1 month ago

I think the issue people arguing with you that you don't seem to get is that not everyone does want it to stop.

You seem blind to that reality that there is a large portion who arent even looking or talking that people are dying.

Who think what is going on and continuing is fine, or even good or right. And those people are in the positions to even try to limit any of it, and wont.

You're not arguing honestly if you really claim the reason no one in power speaks against it is because it's too hard? That seems really unlikely doesn't it? "It's difficult and we're looking at legal options" and "we will continue to arm and defend them" are wholly different.

[-] NuclearDolphin@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 month ago

Soup is an absolute moron with a nuance fetish.

Every matter must be super complex because it hasn't been solved...failing to recognize not everyone wants the problem solved because they benefit from it not being solved. NUANCE!

Either that or they're a Zionist intentionally derailing conversion by finding new "parliamentarian says no" situations for why the genocide must continue.

[-] sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Agreed. Soup is likely here to tire everyone out with his blather. He doesnt post anything in good faith and I doubt he beleives what he says. He is just a classic troll. Sad really. Best to block the user and move on.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You entirely missed the point of everything I’ve said- whether it be on purpose or not, I’m done trying to explain this shit. It’s a pointless exercise in futility to even try and have a nuanced discussion here.

[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

You haven't really said anything though. You just keep claiming "it's complicated bro". How? We're reasonable people here, for the most part. If you can explain why it's not simple, people might listen.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I’d love for just ONE of these people demanding we stop sending weapons to Israel to lay out a plan on exactly how to go about it

I'm pretty sure the answer you're going to get is "1. Stop sending them 2. Profit"

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Pretty much:

Canada joins the Netherlands, Japan, Spain and Belgium in suspending arms sales in the wake of Israel’s brutal military offensive in Gaza. Many other nations have said they will no longer purchase Israeli weapons.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] hungprocess@lemmy.sdf.org 26 points 1 month ago

Since you are a person "with knowledge of how any of it works", please share with the class what those penalties and repercussions are. Educate us poor ignorant "random Internet citizens".

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I don’t have knowledge of how it works. And that is why you don’t seem me injecting my bullshit take on how to resolve it. I don’t claim to know how easy it is to just…. Break a decades long agreement.

I do however listen to the experts when they say that it’s incredibly complicated and detailed situation that goes back decades and involves two countries that have had a conflict since 1948 officially, and predates even that. And that it’s not so simple to just…. Break a decades long agreement.

See?

That’s how an understanding of NUANCE works. You start by learning that you don’t know everthing, and finish with the understanding that not everthing is as black and white as you’d like it to be- that there will always be others that know more about it than you do, and that you should listen to them.

And no, I’m not one of them. I’m simply advocating that you seek them out and listen to what they say. Because I guarantee you, they’re going to school you on what you thought you knew about how to navigate geopolitical diplomacy.

We can all hope that the powers that be find a way to end this as soon as possible. But we’re not helping anyone by assuming simplicity where there isn’t any.

[-] BMTea@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

Your argument is silly. There are laws on the book that empower the State Department to block arms transfers to Israel. The only way this can be undone is if Congress repealed the laws, which is hardly likely.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] SoJB@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It literally is as simple as “stop arming their military with American tax dollars”

What part of this is so difficult to understand?

Oh, I know. It’s because you don’t give a shit. All this performative hand wringing and “nuance” talk just serving to distract from the fact that another dozen kids got shot in the head today with American 7.62.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

"You expect America, with its history of breaking promise and agreement and doing whatever the fuck it wants and giving two middle fingers to anyone that doesnt like it.. to break its promises and agreements with Israel to prevent a genocide? THE NERVE! HOW UNCOUTH! WHY I NEVER!"

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yet another person that thinks it’s simple and easy- while offering no solution.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Count042@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 month ago

It is.

It was easy enough for Reagan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr, and Obama.

It is easy enough to do again.

Seriously, do you have no idea about recent history?

[-] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 month ago

You're right, they should keep supporting acts of genocide because doing anything else is just too darn hard.

Very well said!

[-] sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Israel is going to impose "penalties" on the US? Are you high?

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Israel doesn't get to threaten the world with our weapons. That's why we have laws about this specific thing.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago

More lies to make the rubes think he is against the genocide. He has done this many times before and its always utterly meaningless.

[-] Doom@ttrpg.network 6 points 1 month ago

forgot the government was called Biden Tower

this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
605 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39161 readers
1638 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS