536
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 08 Dec 2023
536 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19104 readers
2228 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Then why are the Democrats supporting genocide? That ain’t Trump’s state department and UN ambassador vetoing a ceasefire.
Your comment has nothing to do with the comment you are replying to.
lol you're all over the board
Au contraire. Judging by the downvotes, I’m exactly where I need to be.
I think they meant that you’re so terminally online I can read a comment and recognize your garbage takes no matter where I go
If my takes are garbage, just ignore them. But you don’t, because they’re not. There’s genocides happening around the world, and you’re complaining about someone being terminally online? SMFH
What have you done about them?
He posted a spicy worthless hot-take on an irrelevant corner of the internet! take that, libcucks!
I learn all I can about what’s going on and talk to others to educate them about what’s happening. I’m doing what I can. If that’s not enough for you, that’s a you problem. Doing _literally anything _ is better than doing nothing. Which is apparently what want me to do. This is the second time you’ve advocated for inaction. Why?
In other words, you argue with people on the internet. How helpful.
And that bothers you? What are you here for, recipes?
No, it doesn't bother me that you think you're fighting genocide by arguing on the internet. It amuses me.
While I agree with your intent, your tact here is pretty counterproductive. Making a point in such a way that it causes the Internet version of a mass eye roll suggests you're getting written off.
What good does that do?
Thanks for the constructive criticism. It won’t be dismissed. It’s sometimes difficult to temper a response after another user calls you “ dickcheese.” I’ll try do better.
You triggered, Captain Dick Cheese? What are you gonna do about it? Shoot up a school?
I got promoted. I must be doing something right.
The irony here is hilarious
Haha, you’re right.
Because the Democrats are conservatives.
That’s a bingo! But what are they conserving? Is it capitalist hegemony in the world? We’ll never know.
Billionaire profits, mostly.
Can you have too many pancakes? They’re delicious.
Personally I think they're desperately trying to keep the Jewish vote... no other reason. It's horrible pandering.
I think that's part of it, but I the government is also using Israel as a proxy, and we do have silicon manufacturing there. The government has a vested military and security interest in Israel (money and power is far more important, the votes are a bonus).
Unlike all of the other countries in the Middle East, Israel is surrounded only by enemies. Israel can't turn on the US without a replacement military superpower, so they're effectively bound to the US for guaranteed protection.
Example: Despite Iran's posturing they weren't going to attack knowing they'd get a military response from the US if they did. They almost certainly could get away with attacking a different country the US isn't protecting though without anything more than sanctions.
The US can support Israel's right to exist along with the Palestinians too and could pressure Israel to have a more reserved response that didn't kill so many Palestinian civilians. And in fact it's clear many in the administration want this. However as there are definitely ardent Israel supporters that have no empathy for the civilians plight and that have deep pockets and long memories, it appears Biden is very reluctant to offend them right before an election.
None of this is mutually exclusive with what I said and you got really close to my point...
I keep seeing everyone talking about only a few groups:
I'm not seeing anyone mention the group of people who do not care about Israel as a people either and only want to protect their money and power and view Israel as a tool to do so.
That last group is currently escaping the headlines which are essentially all about people who are vocally pro-/anti-Israel or pro-/anti-Palestinians and not about the group who care about neither. The last group needs more attention because they will be funding the next war too.
I think the issue here, hence why you're getting dragged, is Democrat ≠ progressive, therefore your comment is a bit of a non sequitur.
It is a non sequitur. I just found it odd to scorn conservatives for genocide while not mentioning that Democrats are actively abetting a current one.
I think it's a non sequitur because American Democrats ARE conservatives, as is noted later. With that in mind, the comment chain reads as:
Them: Conservatives have always supported genocide.
You: Then why is the other conservative group supporting genocide?
I believe a significant chunk of the site agrees with you regarding the subject matter, I'm just pointing out why I believe it's not going over well. Take it or leave it, I'm just trying to provide constructive criticism.
Edit: shit, i read your comment as "it is not a non sequitur". I'm too tired, words hard, leaving original comment for posterity.
Don’t apologize for being secure enough to apologize. There is so much negativity on here, that you absorb it without realizing. Much love 💕