49 points

All she has to do is tell Benny to fuck off and not give him weapons. Thats it. Nobody is asking for a miracle, everyone is demanding to stop enabling and abetting.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

They are required by law passed in 2008 to ensure Israel has a “Qualitative Military Advantage” over the area. They can’t just stop giving weapons completely as it is literally illegal.

They would have to show that Israel has more than enough to defend themselves from all likely attackers before they could prevent it, and if they do guess what: they don’t need weapons to keep on keepin on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

They can’t just stop giving weapons completely as it is literally illegal.

What about the Leahy laws? Isn’t it illegal to continue?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

No, those laws don’t count because those in power are either scared to stop or don’t want to because they support the genocide.

Functionally, there is no difference between cowardice and enthusiastic complicity. And the enablers of genocide should not get the benefit of the doubt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Could one argue that since Israel pretty clearly possesses nuclear weapons even if they wont directly admit to it, that they should be able to deter attacks that actually stand a chance at threatening the existence of the country due to the threat of those weapons, and therefore already have the required advantage without additional US assistance?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You’re right. No more weapons to Israel. Guess they’ll just have to use their nukes then.

I really wish people would take a moment and really consider what they are suggesting first.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

The fact that Israel is wasting ordinance blowing up civilians and brazenly striking into other countries like Iran makes me think they are rather confident in their military capabilities and so we should let them manage with the resources they have.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They are also required by the Leahy law to cut off all military aid to any human rights abusers. The State Department confirmed there were war crimes that took place (a number posted as videos by soldiers), but the Secretary of State overrode his own department to illegally give the aid anyway.

All Harris has to do is say she will obey the laws no matter what her feelings may be on the topic. She’s a prosecutor and knows this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Is that a self imposed law? Who would even litigate it? Israel can go fuck themselves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I feel like cutting them off and pointing out that a qualitative military advantage doesn’t give a nation some magical free pass for genocide isn’t particularly complex. Beyond that, since when does the US government let legalities stop them from doing what they want?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

There is a law that makes everything illegal and another law that makes everything legal. It’s purely up to the authoritarian regime masters, aka district attorneys and congress, to decide to do anything or not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

She cannot do that unfortunately. She’s vice president in a government that explicitly doesn’t do that, and she can’t openly deviate while running.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why not? What’s Biden gonna do? Fire her?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

From a foreign policy perspective it’s extremely undesirable to have the President and VP provide different messages. Who should (foreign) diplomats listen to? Who should be send to peace negotiations if different members of the cabinet have different positions? I don’t think something like that has ever happened.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Yes, she can, or already has won them back. “Uncommitted” was primarily about sending a message, and it was effective at doing that. I would be surprised if the majority of them planned on not voting for Biden, and now Harris, in the general.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

They’re still saying they might vote uncommitted. They want Kamala to stop sending arms to Israel but so far she has refused.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points
ABC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

Information for ABC News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.News

https://abcnews.go.com/538/harris-win-back-bidens-israel-gaza-critics/story?id=112899195

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

permalink
report
reply
-10 points

Nobody can, so nobody should care.

Biden≠Harris, never has been.

If they want to project guilt onto people without considering the equal yet opposite outcome their opinions are moot.

Not being able to accept that two things can be wrong at once and disregarding the potential possibilities seem to be VERY popular this election year LOL.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

You get she’s still the Vice President of the Biden Administration right?

The Uncommitted Movement, anti-genocide protestors, want a change in the Administration from the unconditional military support supplying a genocide, to a conditional support that forces Israel to abide by International Laws and not commit genocide.

Harris has the opportunity to pivot on Gaza and make it a partisan issue. That’s a major way to win some critical swing states. It’s good policy and good politics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Removed, civility.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points

Given the fact that I saw “Sry don’t give a fuck about Gaza while our own democracy is at risk. Fighting progress for perfection is how you end up dead.” was a highly upvoted comment on a Gaza post, it’s safe to assume that the 90% “current thing” leftists have do not care anymore

permalink
report
reply
4 points

You seem to confuse Liberals with Leftists. Said Liberals were already planning to vote for Biden despite the Genocide.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

They were planning to vote for Biden because of the genocide.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oh. You’re one of the people urging an admin switch to “Israel should finish the job” Donald. “Surely we will see an immediate ceasefire enforced on Israel by the party telling us to deport protesters to Gaza and nuke the area.”

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 9.9K

    Posts

  • 163K

    Comments