1477
president of peace everybody
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
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 17 Jun 2025
1477 points (100.0% liked)
Microblog Memes
8233 readers
1896 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Biden/Harris would have done something similar to defend Israel from the consequences of its actions. Biden did bomb Yemen after all when it tried to stop the genocide. Biden is a self admitted Zionist and defended Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and supported the invasion of Iraq. Harris did nothing to distance herself from him.
Trump killed more civilians in Yemen this one excursion than the US did in the previous 23 years.
There is bad, and there is this bad. And not differentiating between the two is criminal.
By the time Biden has left office he was already responsible for over 30,000 deaths in Palestine. They are all bad.
By this point, there are only two ways to not understand what the degrees of bad are. Either you really, deeply, powerfully don't give a flying fuck about people's lives, and you see people as numbers you want to use to own the libs or whatever, or you are are so disconnected from reality, you really don't understand what differentiate more suffering from less suffering.
I really don't know what's worse, but both of those possibilities are deeply disturbing. You might feel like you're a good person, but you really aren't.
Do you deny that it was a genocide when Biden was president or do you deny his complicity? That's the only way your comment would make any sense.
I am trying to convey you one very simple series of principles.
Two things can simultaneously be bad.
One of two things can be worse than another.
It is your moral duty and obligation to ensure that in situation where one or another thing will be chosen, you chose one that is less bad.
Yeah, in most regards kamala would've been better, but this is Israel. She may have been less gung ho, which would be better for a handful of Iranians benefitting from slightly fewer bombs, but not better enough
Well, there is no real support for a war in the democratic party, democratic party is influencable to some extent, and leader of it has to listen to the party and to voters, at least somewhat. There is no dictator on day one bullshit.