Thank you, thank you, thank you. It feels better knowing that at least one other person around here gets it. I've been trying to explain this to people since the start of this whole thing and all I get is downvoted into oblivion for it.

On the other side is a bigger powerful, well-funded pro-Israel lobby (which the Palestinians don’t have) and a traditionally fairly cohesive and influential pro-Israel voting block.

The bolding is my own addition. I think this is the part people seem to refuse to understand. The pro-Israel side is many times larger than the pro-Palestine side. Even if he were to change positions the day that Israel bombed the first hospital, all that would mean is that we'd be seeing even larger pro-Israel protests instead of pro-Palestine ones, and politicians from both parties would be taking Biden to task for essentially abandoning one of our allies.

And I agree with your assessment that at this point, all he's doing is pissing both sides off. But in reality, there was never a situation where he wasn't going to piss off somebody. From the point of view of his attempts to get re-elected, he's probably taking the least shitty option available to him. Whether or not any of us agree on if it's the morally correct choice, I at least can acknowledge and understand that the other options available to him are all significantly worse and would only significantly increase Trump's chances of winning, which is just worse for everybody regardless of which side of the issue you're on.

It's critical for the USA that he win this next election - Trump is an existential threat to Democracy in the US.

It's critical for the world that Trump not win.

Trump is immediately going to stop any support for Ukraine and hand that to Putin on a silver platter, is going to weaken NATO and the UN as much as he possibly can, and is going to flip the US from the virtual 'allies' to 'axis' before the end of his first next four years. Which will go on as long as he is alive, as once he gets power he's not giving it up.

He isn't even playing coy with his praise for megalomaniacal current dictators, especially Putin.

With Trump in charge of the US, you can expect him and Putin together actively working to spread Christian fascism to Europe using subversion and eventually force where needed.

It's not just the US that's on the line in November.

So I think the irony is that if standing with Israel means he can win the election, it’s still a better outcome for Palestine than if he loses. If he loses the election, Trump will tell Israel to just go ahead and glass the area.

The irony is how much you have twisted your political beliefs to find a position you feel ok about this from.

The majority of Americans think what Israel is doing is heinous and want it to stop, the idea that Americans are evenly divided on this is not grounded in reality.

So why are the republicans freaking out?

The bare minimum used to be calling for a ceasefire.

Some people will never be satisfied, so it's pointless to try to satisfy them.

Terrorism is not an ideological choice, it is a military strategy employed by groups that do not have the means to fight a more traditional conflict.

Hamas uses “terrorism” but the IDF doesn’t need “terrorism” because it has tanks, advanced fighter jets and one of the most advanced and well armed militaries in the world. It can just slaughter innocent tens of thousands of Palestinians and claim it is doing “military operations” and the world media will shake their heads and agree.

I especially can’t stand that people keep treating it as a fact here that US voters are split 50-50 on Israel’s genocide to stop. The polling is clear, US voters with a decisive majority support Palestine and ending this genocide.

People in this thread asserting that most Americans support Israeli’s actions in this genocide rather than support Palestinians as a some kind of indisputable fact as part of their rhetorical arguments is a self fulfilling prophecy of attempting to manufacture consensus where it doesn’t exist.

I can certainly appreciate the point, but realistically what can he actually do? Israel have already shown that they don't actually give a toss about what the US of A thinks. The US have said stop hundreds of times already and Israel have carried on bombing refugee camps. Even if he stops sending any weapons right this minute or even at the start of the war... would that have actually stopped Israel no, would Iran have actually launched a straight up invasion, you betcha.

The next option is to go to war with Israel and return Israel back to the mandate. This will take well over a few months, in which time if Trump is elected, as another commentator said, he's likely just to authorize Israel to and I quote "glass Palestine". Thousands of people verse Millions of people, it's a horrifying choice.

Do you think the risk of losing is preferrable?

It's a fucked up situation, but until enough of the voterbase is convinced or he no longer has to worry about the election, he's in an awful bind.

The unpleasant truth is that, to some extent, the US is still a democracy, and the opinion of the people matters. If the majority of the US populace doesn't see it as genocide, it is democratically right for him to act on that opinion.

Which means the fault isn't with him alone - arguably, he could take the risk and attempt to inform people - but also with the voters, the propaganda that misled them and the fucked up election system.

The mass graves for starters that were discovered after the IDF left the area. The indiscriminate bombing of hospitals, UN assigned refugee camps don't go amiss either. The forceful expulsion of millions of people from their homes to ever smaller and smaller parts of Gaza. Perhaps where the IDF told people to go to certain places for safety and then promptly bombed those places.This is supported by statements made my ministers or representatives in the Israeli legislature and government, including current and former ministers. The denial/restriction of aid and water.

This is completely aside from using trumped up evidence absent charges that members of the UN agency were supporting Hamas in order to disrupt funding to a UN refugee agency. They also used this as an excuse to raid hospitals providing necessary medical care, doctors and nurses have been killed. Oh and killing aid workers... repeatedly. I think the first excuse was "it wasn't us" which turned into "it was us but it was an accident" to "it was us, we deemed them a thread"... another incident was... World Kitchen? That was just such a shitshow for the IDF that someone actually got the boot.

There's plenty of evidence available, it's literally everywhere and often published/reported on by international media.

Maybe so, but analysis from an anonymous lawyer is still no better than analysis from an internet stranger.

What would you think about a letter casting doubt on, say, climate change signed by 50 university professors? I would immediately check their affiliation. If they are all from the Department of Music, then their opinion is no better than anyone else's.

Likewise, law is a highly subspecialized field. For all I know, the letter was written by a bunch of IP lawyers. In which case, their opinions on potential war crimes would not be particularly valuable.