478
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
478 points (100.0% liked)
Palestine
1542 readers
175 users here now
A community to discuss everything Palestine.
Rules:
-
Posts can be in Arabic or English.
-
Please add a flair in the title of every post. Example: “[News] Israel annexes the West Bank ”, “[Culture] Musakhan is the nicest food in the world!”, “[Question] How many Palestinians live in Jordan?”
List of flairs: [News] [Culture] [Discussion] [Question] [Request] [Guide]
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Of course I care about the Gazan people, that's why I didn't want the "glass them all" party to win. But because they're not good, we let fucking awful go for it instead. One side has a chance to be reasoned with, and the other is no chance in hell. Inaction chose the no chance in hell option.
I'm not going to lie and say there was a good choice available. But we chose greater violence while preaching for no violence. So I don't know what to tell you, other than sometimes you have to compromise to engage in harm mitigation otherwise you can end up with harm maximization.
The Democracy are also that party.
Actively genocidal is more than just not good. I should even go so far as to call them "fucking hell".
Anthony Blinken and the Democrats are the no chance in hell option. They spent over a year proving it! They would rather lose the election then stop doing genocide. At least Trump is so mercurial and narcissistic that an Arab leader flattering him or an Israeli politician being rude sometimes makes him break from Israel a bit.
No, you didn't. You just chose the one that doesn't bother to mask it.
But that doesn't mean much coming from someone who cannot properly assess the harm that the two options are doing. It seems that every "lesser evil" advocate ends up having to white wash the Democrats to justify their position. Apparently even they can't justify voting for the actual Democrats as they really are.