234
submitted 5 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 42 points 5 months ago
[-] ChihuahuaOfDoom@lemmy.world 27 points 5 months ago

You seem to be ill informed, he's going to wag his finger so hard it'll give off a light breeze.

[-] eestileib@sh.itjust.works 8 points 5 months ago

Can't furrow his brow any more because of the botox.

[-] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

The worst part about it is that he is the better option.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

Yeah, I too would much rather get pneumonia than stage 4 leukemia. Would have been swell to get neither, though..

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Not if Blinken continues to provide inconclusive reports. POTUS makes international diplomacy decisions based on intelligence provided by the State Department. It’s not based the President’s opinion, US citizens, news, the UN, the ICC, or the ICJ, but state intelligence. Biden needs to put pressure on Blinken to provide a thorough and conclusive report, or replace him with someone who will.

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 4 points 5 months ago

I’m fairly certain the fact that Biden has received more Israeli political donations than any other United States politician in history has more influence of potus than the state department

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

That would matter if he deviated from Congress or the State Department.

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

Dude, the state department looks like a bunch of chuckle fucks trying to say that there is no ground offensive in Rafah while Israel is broadcasting their tanks in the middle of the city.

Biden’s policy on Israel is as morally reprehensible as it gets. There is no lower. There is no worse position.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

I agree. They also just had members step down and say their reported information was suppressed or altered. He needs to press Blinken for a conclusive report or replace him.

To amend existing contracts against the advisement of the State Department, against congressional legislation, is unfounded. He could even be impeached for bad faith.

[-] homura1650@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago

Blinken is releasing the reports thr president wants released. The actual intelligence is provided in classified reports provided to the president and some members of Congress. What gets made public is a policy decision that flows down from the top.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

That does not change if the report is conclusive or inconclusive, nor does it change the content within. It only limits what can and cannot be shared with the public.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

The evidence that makes the difference between conclusive and inconclusive could easily be classified. In which case it wouldn't be shared with the public.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That’s not how classified documents work. It would still be a conclusive report. He would be able to act on the information, and only disclose what he is capable of disclosing. The report was found to be inconclusive, meaning there was no proof of crimes committed by Israel found by the State Department.

If POTUS was not allowed to act on classified information, there would be no point in having a State Department at all.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

State Dept intelligence might influence POTUS' decisions, but it isn't the only factor.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It isn’t. It’s just the most heavily weighed piece of intelligence in the Executive Branch. The Legislative Branch is the other factor, and Congress voted in favor of legislation for munitions supply.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

But not necessarily the biggest factor in making the decision.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Yes, it is. That’s how POTUS decides how to proceed in international affairs. It’s not just some shot from the hip.

News outlets and citizens can talk all day, but we pay tens of trillions annually to have the most informed State Department in the world. It’s the President’s job to trust their intelligence. If the State Department says there is no proof of war crimes, it’s POTUS’s job to take that as fact. If he doesn’t agree with the findings, he can mandate a re-assessment, as I initially suggested that he should.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

Yes, it is. That’s how POTUS decides how to proceed in international affairs. It’s not just some shot from the hip.

Are you saying all US presidents react to intelligence reports in the same way? That's ridiculous. When candidates are campaigning for the office of POTUS they normally publicize the international policy that they intend to enforce. And each candidate has a unique view on international politics, even within the same party.

You don't honestly believe both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump would act the same as Joe Biden in response to Blinkens' intelligence reports, do you?

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I’m saying that amending existing bills and contracts for allied support, against congressional approval and without substantiated cause from US intelligence would be considered an act of bad faith, yes. I’m honestly not even sure the last time that was done by a President.

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 2 points 5 months ago

And Biden also went around congress to fast track weapons multiple times.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

That’s true. He did that prior to pausing shipments pending the State Department investigation. Chronology is important.

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

So are the facts. And the fact is Biden has received more Israeli pac money than any other politician in United States history over the course of his career.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

I absolutely agree that should be considered if he were supporting Israel against congressional legislation or the advisement of the State Department.

[-] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago

Which he did multiple times the most recently being only a few weeks ago.

What are you actually defending.

There is no lower moral bar than Biden’s current policy with Israel.

I get it you don’t like Trump, but on this issue dude there is no defense and there is no worse policy position than the one being implemented by Biden administration right now.

To say otherwise makes you look like a psychopath.

[-] mihies@kbin.social 37 points 5 months ago

It's like those 35,000+ so far don't count. Let's start with dozens.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Listening to Kirby yesterday was enraging. "Israel said that they are doing everything in their power to limit civilian casualties in their Rafah operations, and we have no reason not to take them at their word"

Really? Because have they ever bothered to limit civilian casualties so far? Media kept re-probing him to see if he would give any sympathetic response, instead he dug in, got annoyed that they were asking similar questions and reiterated how he doesn't think the Israelis did anything bad. Biden should fire Kirby just for his complete lack to tact.

[-] acockworkorange@mander.xyz 14 points 5 months ago

Did I hear something about a metaphorical red line?

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Really starting to think that if USS Liberty happened again, Biden still would not change anything despite not being able to cover it up like LBJ due to the modern age of media and internet.

[-] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago

Hamas shouldn't store weapons near civilian areas. They should also release the hostages and surrender.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 13 points 5 months ago

I don't think you're being downvoted because anyone disagrees with you. Of course the terrorist organization should stop terrorizing people. But your comment really comes across as apologizing for the civilian deaths.

"You're not wrong, you're just an asshole."

[-] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

I'm not apologizing for anything. The 'enlightened' leftists and college 'protestors' need to realize a cold hard fact. When you hide your forces among civilians and use them as human shields to protect military installations (ammo dump, command center, launchers, etc), in effect deliberately maximizing your own civilian casualties to dissuade attacks, you are not only committing a war crime, but you are forfeiting the protections of those civilians under international law, and those installations remain a valid military target in the eyes of the law.

So by Hamas operating out of schools, mosques, refugee camps, hospitals, and other civilian areas, they are the ones responsible for those civilian deaths, because they are putting civilians in harms way.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago

What are you talking about? No one is defending Hamas.

maximizing your own civilian casualties to dissuade attack

The civilians do not belong to Hamas. What exactly do you mean by "your own civilian casualties?"

So by Hamas operating out of schools, mosques, refugee camps, hospitals, and other civilian areas, they are the ones responsible for those civilian deaths, because they are putting civilians in harms way.

No. Whoever killed the innocent people is responsible.

[-] Count042@lemmy.ml 7 points 5 months ago

Okay Genocide justifier.

You do realize this logic is the same as if someone from a different household punches you, it gives you the moral right to shoot someone else from that same household in the head, right?

Finally, this blind allegiance to a morally wrong actor is going to make the rest of the world treat Israelis as the world treated Apartheid South Africans. I hope you enjoy being ostracized.

[-] whatwhatwhatwhat@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

To add to this, Hamas has agreed to release the hostages several times. However Israel won’t agree to a ceasefire, and so the hostages haven’t been released.

Israel doesn’t want the hostages released, because then they can’t use the hostages as justification for their genocide.

[-] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago

false equivalence

[ fawls i-kwiv-uh-luhns ] Phonetic (Standard) IPA noun

a logical fallacy in which one assumes or asserts that two things are the same or equal when, while alike in some ways, they are not sufficiently similar to be considered equivalent.
[-] Count042@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 months ago

Claiming something is a false equivalence doesn't make it so. You want to make a claim like that, you have to justify it.

But I know you won't, because you're happy with the charred corpses of babies.

this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
234 points (100.0% liked)

News

23281 readers
3592 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS