86
Delection (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 month ago by linkerbaan@lemmy.ml to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 28 points 1 month ago

thank god trump one and so now the genocide is all over.

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 month ago

No one forced the democrats to do this:

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 22 points 1 month ago

yeah its not like republicans tied ukraine aid to aid for israel or anything. /s

[-] finderscult@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 month ago

Maybe we shouldn't have supported Ukraine if it meant supporting genocide

[-] lengau@midwest.social 6 points 1 month ago

And in a mirror universe where that decision got made someone's arguing "maybe we shouldn't have cut funding to Israel if it meant allowing the genocide in Ukraine."

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 4 points 1 month ago

what gets me is would the hamas attack and thus the isreali response happen without putin. Im very suspicious that he was not pushing on making more chaos globally to get our of the cluster fuck he started.

[-] Minarble@aussie.zone 2 points 1 month ago

You seem very picky as to which genocide is ok.

The Russian land grab and physical and cultural genocide of Ukraine.

The Israeli land grab and physical and cultural genocide of Gaza/Palestine.

You can’t be absolutist about one and hand wave the other.

No purity for you.

[-] finderscult@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The US is not currently causing the genocide in Ukraine.

The US has not spent 80 years covering for genocide in Ukraine.

The US has not spent 80 years being the attack dog of another nation commiting genocide in Ukraine.

I'm not in Russia. I was not born in Russia. I do not pay taxes to Russia.

[-] StinkySocialist@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 2 points 1 month ago

this gets into a completely seperate thing. He could not give them it without congress but the US only very reluctantly restricts commerce. Its a very different thing to say im not going to fund your war and im not going to sell you stuff when dealing with a long time ally. And no you don't just throw away diplomatic relationships easily. If countries did they would have stopped having dealing with us in trumps first term.

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

Oh so you're telling me Biden had no choice. Ithe most powerful man in the world couldn't do anything but enable Israel and its genocide?

Oh that makes sense and doesn't fly in the face of reality at all. /s

Bonus for you

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary?cycle=All&ind=Q05&recipdetail=S

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 1 points 1 month ago

It would not have been impossible but it would have been problematic. I mean he could send troops with the war powers act. Its possible but not really something he could realistically do.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

Problematic to stop genocide? Reflect on what you just said, that's monstrous.

[-] StinkySocialist@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

Cowbee I just want you to know I have you tagged as "comrade fighting the good fight" and stumbling upon your comments educating people always makes my day a bit better. That's all🙂🛠️

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago

Thank you, appreciate the kind words! I'm going to step away from Lemmy for a few days and touch grass, but I'll be back 🫡

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 month ago

Thank goodness the Democrats perpetuated the genocide in Gaza so they wouldn't lose to Trump! 🤦

[-] Alice@beehaw.org 13 points 1 month ago

Yup. I don't understand why people are talking like Harris isn't also pro-genocide. Obviously more Americans are going to die under Trump and that's a tragedy too, but why are people pretending the election was about Palestine?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The election was never about Palestine, ultimately the Dems lost of their own volition by running rightward with Liz Cheney. Rather than going with a safe win like ending support for genocide and running on a progressive platform, or even a Leftist platform (which the DNC would never do, for the record, even if it would win), they deliberately chose to lose to the reps. Their donors would rather have Trump than progressive Dems win.

More Americans would die under Harris as well. The US Empire is crumbling, even if Harris won that wouldn't stop that process, what's necessary is for the working class to get organized.

Meanwhile, Palestine burns and the Dems got away with it.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago

Rather than going with a safe win like ending support for genocide

Irrelevant

Trump ran on “the Dems aren’t doing enough for Israel” and won the Arabic vote

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago

Trump didn't win the Arab-American vote, Harris lost it. Arab-Americans pivoted towards the Green Party and PSL.

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It’s the same thing

How many elections has the messaging been “a vote for Stein is a vote for Republicans”

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

It is not the same thing, lol. If Arab-Americans wanted Trump to win, they would have voted for Trump.

[-] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 month ago

He didn't though, Jill stein got like 40 percent, Harris and Trump got 20 each.

Honestly this simplification comes off as disingenuous and attempting to play Arab voters are more conservative and backwards.

this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2024
86 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

45889 readers
1108 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS