I’ve asked and they would prefer if we stopped giving Israel billions in military aid and weapons instead.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
It's a perfectly logical position if your main priority is to remain on your high moral horse and take no responsibility for your choices, which I know tends to be the only goal for many non-voters. I've encountered those who felt they are too smart/too moral/too informed to vote all across Europe I never try to convince them to actually vote - as much as their non-participation strengthens the extremists, if they are so self-centered and naive there's a very good they'd fall for populist bullshit anyway.
Right, so given a choice only between X and Y and asked how one is marginally better than the other, the correct answer is to ignore reality and say "I'd actually like Z". That's a very politically effective position
@That_Bloke
Can you show me where I made a comment that is any way counter to the statement you were referring to?
Show me the "denial" i made that argues against the US being motivated by their own self interest?
This is a very overwrought framing.
When people went to vote in November they were presented with a ballot that had multiple choices for various elected positions. For example here is one from Sullivan County in NY. They can pick the president, the senator, their representative, state senator, member of the assembly, and I think county coroner. Many people do not vote in every part of the ballot, because they might not know the candidates, not like any of them, etc. They are still participating in democracy.
I can't fathom how you arrived at the logic that the lazy position is the one that factors in the actual candidates record to determine future outcomes. That's lazier than ignoring actual events and focusing purely on a future promise/hypothetical?
This isn't a vacuum the Biden/Harris administration have blame for the current situation it's bedded in. Trump will do a lot of disgusting shit I'm sure but he has to climb a mountain of bodies before he's obviously worse.
The plan was always to ethnically cleanse Gaza and Harris would have supported Israel throughout that process. If your difference is two arsonists burning your house down but one gives you a glass of water then sure yeah that's hugely different and completely relevant.
But we are talking about the presidential election in a country where president has a lot of power, in the context of Israeli aggression. If you care about this specific issue (where policy is driven in a very large part by the president) and willingly don't vote for the president, you resign from having a voice and your opinion is completely irrelevant - whether you voted for the county coroner, or not.
Spare me the condescending bullshit. I've voted in every single election in my life, I've campaigned for 3 different parties, I've participated in countless political initiatives, demonstrations and protests. I've volunteered and donated money for numerous causes I believe in. I don't give two fecks about any horse.
I will, however, never vote for or help in any way someone who participated in a genocide.
Funny you suggest I'm focusing purely on a future promise/hypothetical and then when Trump openly confirms his plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza (that's a fact and that's what he said) you claim Harris would have supported Israel throughout that process (that's hypothetical and something you can only assume).
Moving the goalposts is another thing as initially you asked
and when given an answer to your specific questions about stuff "slightly marginally better" for Palestinians, you come back with the arsonist metaphor and ironic comments on what's "hugely different and completely relevant".
If you asked in the first place about what's "hugely different and completely relevant" that Harris would've done, I wouldn't answer your question because there's nothing "hugely different". But your question was completely different and the world is a bit more nuanced than black and white, so I believe Trump cutting billions of humanitarian aid to Palestinians while maintaining support to Israel is a "slightly marginal difference" for the people in Gaza.
In this specific instance, the lie is you pretending that berbatrick is saying that Harris and Trump are similar on Palestine because Harris sent Torres to Michigan.
Re Biden, have I made any comments re him being "better" than Trump? I have not defended Biden in any way. He got played by Bibi. Bibi knew, especially with it being in the US election season, that Biden would have a very difficult time in pushing back on Israel. Win / win for Bibi - you either continue to support and not condemn, or else Trump will seize on this and slaughter you for it for being weak on Hamas / terrorists. Harris inherited that problem in the campaign, which i think it why she tired to chart the middle ground and ended up pleasing no one.
The only thing I have said on Biden v Trump is that i believe that under Trump the devastation would have been much worse.
Re the Tweet. Not surprised Bibi was planning this. Do we know Biden was onside with the plan to permanently move people from Gaza?
My argument has been that Harris would not necessarily followed the same path as Biden. Nor do i think she is "complicit" in all his decision making just because she was the VP and because she didn't come out during the campaign and criticise Biden on Gaza, nor any other issue. She was never going to throw him under the bus and posters on here somehow think that as VP, if you don't come out and condemn the actions of your boss, then you are by default in total agreement of his policy.
Then what is the aim of making the point re Torres ?
No need to apologise and no offense taken, your comment was clearly in good faith.
As i mentioned in my previous comment there are other evidences for the Biden administration pushing for the forceful transfer of the Palestinians from Gaza, there are plenty of credible reports of the Biden administration trying to make a deal with Sisi and King Abdullah, both told them to get lost and Trump will be getting same response. Your issue seems that this never came from the horse's mouth unlike Trump, whilst this is correct Trump was brazen about it while Biden never was, in this respect, in pure optical terms i agree it's not the same. The point i have always argued that they both have the same objective in this respect hence equal to each other and the evidence on the ground is there for everyone to see. As @Idxomer pointed out Biden has already overseen ethnic cleansing of parts of Gaza - so at the time of writing Biden has already partly done what Trump says he's going to do.
To be honest, I'm not even sure what's worse, the guy who openly tells you he's a piece of sh!t or the guy who's a piece of sh!t but tries to hide it. The duplicate nature of the Biden administration has been laid bare many times during this conflict. The most recent example being that they were always adamant that the IOF never deliberately targets civilians but Biden recently did an interview talking about how he had conversation with Netanyahu telling him he can't carpet bomb civilian areas even if the 'bad guys' are there, this doesn't just expose the lies it also exposes that he knew US bombs were being used to mercilessly kill civilians but did nothing about it, infact he continued to send the munitions.
Is this a serious question? It was one point out of many, the totality of those points together were intended to create a picture of Harris's Palestine policy. Do you actually not understand this?
Say if I were to write up some points on Trump and Palestine:
- Helped push through a ceasefire, something the previous administration continuously failed to do.
- Has expressed a wish to completely ethnically cleanse Gaza, and somehow incorporate it into the US.
- Would likely have kept to approximately GOP's usual Israel policy if he was the president during the last 18 months.
- This is meant to be an example, not an exhaustive list, so I'm stopping here.
Say also that based on this list, I conclude that Trump is likely to be worse for the Palestinians in Gaza than Biden or Harris.
Are you able to understand that someone saying "NotThatSoph thinks Trump is worse than Biden and Harris because of the ceasefire" is a lie?
I can't be arsed, but there's poll posted here stated that Harris stance on Gaza turns alot of Dems voter off.
What hypocrisy? Anyone who choose to stay at home and don't vote for Dems knows exactly that Trump couldn't care less about Palestinians. And it yeah it can't be worse. I don't know about you, but for me, I can't say that genocide is better than ethnic cleansing. It's just too ridiculous to even consider it.
I was referring to the reactions of Dems on Trump being president, not about the situation on Gaza
Fact is the Pro Palestine crowd wasn't even saying anything in the first place. They were reacting to Dems who were gaslighting them as if it's a gotcha moment on what Trump want to do in Gaza.
Harris and Democrats ran an incompetent campaign, ignoring their base and turning them off. Instead of focusing on that, they're blaming those who opposed genocide?
Thanks for making your position clear on Biden, i believe that's a misunderstanding on my part there.
Regarding Harris, the jury was out on her regarding this issue and she had the chance to win over pro Palestine votes by distancing herself from Biden's position, but instead she decided to actively sideline them and gave no indication of any change. I've said this many times before but you can't win elections by just arguing you are less worse than the other guy, what happened in Gaza under the Biden administration (which included Harris) was truly horrific and people felt strongly about it, some even lost friends and family because of it, expecting these people to vote for Harris just because the other guy would be potential worse without even trying to show how she would be better was like p1ssing in the wind. Essential it's lazy and dismissive of genuine grievances.
What about exercising your democratic right to NOT vote? A democracy allows you to make a free choice of to vote or not and who to vote for if you choose to vote. That's the whole point of a democracy FFS.
I can't believe this argument is or at times, has taken over so many threads. It's also in the Trump thread, was in the Biden thread and I'm sure in the US politics thread too. Sadly, it doesn't show any sign of stopping anytime soon as it keeps getting brought up again and again and just doesn't get anyone anywhere.
alright, sorry
I'm always arguing in favour of people's right to abstain. I was doing it early somewhere. I've probably had enough internet arguments today though so I'll kindly back away from this one now, apologies for any offence caused
it’s done to derail the thread. simple as.
You're arguing semantics now to win an argument rather than debate a point. I've already answered your query on why I don't believe it's a marginally better outcome and I'm expanding on that such is how conversation works.
What Trump says isn't something that's happened or necessarily will happen, you're correct that I put more stock in what has actually happened under an administration. Based on what the Biden/Harris administration did and what they showed they wouldn't do there's no marginal improvement worth discussing from the Dems because the worst has already happened and they denied the truth we could all see.
As the above posts mention the pollution of the partisan side taking and spin into this thread from the other threads is a bit distasteful so let's leave it there.
So what? She sent a pro-Isreal congress member to perform outreach to Jewish voters.
She also met personally with the Mayor of Deerborn.
We know she is is "pro Israel". No one is saying anything otherwise.
That doesn't mean that part of her policy was to ever occupy or "own" Gaza, like Trump is now stating.
You're not replying to what is being written. Is that on purpose?
We agree to disagree on the european countries
On the palestinians having more resilience than us, no doubt about it, I would not endure a 1% of what gazans had been enduring and sure there is s substantial % that is resistance or nothing, specially the ones that they lost everything, including loved ones. But the ones that they still have loved ones to lose, I am not that certain. Regardless it is something that I can't control. They will be forced, wanting or not and despite knowing that ethnically cleansing gaza is atrocious, if ceasefire is broken and the onslaught continues, I would rather prefer ethnically cleansing than genocide. And it comes from a good heart train of thought, not from the mofos that promotes it to benefit of a only Israel state supremacy, racism, facism and greed to get rid of the problem
And to circle back, my argument is the one that would be used by european countries but in bad faith
Misunderstanding accepted.
I see that. She didn't create seperation on this or any issues. She was in a bad position from the start. You either undermine your boss, who you served under for four years and who gave your the opportunity to run for President. Or you try and stick with him and accept his wins but also his many failures, including on Gaza. Not an easy task with 90 days to create a campaign.
Does that mean her future policy was the same though?
Her stated potion over and over was that she supported with Israel's right to defend itself, she supported the Palestinians right to self determination, to end the war, bring home hostages and work toward a two state solution.
Trumps is to kick the Palestinians out of Gaza for good and create a US owned "Middle Eastern Riviera" where people.
Excuse me for thinking that having Harris as US President would not have led to a better outcome for the Palestinian people. We will never know for sure, so really, at this point, it is fruitless to even discuss it anymore.
We have Trump and lets just see how it unfolds.
Nor are you re Richie Torres.
Yes, I'm not responding to you trying to change the subject, that's correct. You didn't ask, but I'll tell you that it was on purpose. I asked if you did it on purpose, you didn't answer.
Here is what's happening, if you're actually struggling and not just lying:
- I told you you're lying again.
- You asked how.
- I told you.
- You replied with a question indicating confusion.
- I replied with a comment trying to explain to you how lists work. In this comment, I asked you a few questions.
- You tried to change the subject.
- Here we are.
Are you going to engage with what we're talking about, or are you not?
I live close to his constituency, so I think I'm well qualified in saying that it was an insulting, brain-dead decision to send Ritchie fecking Torres (of all the congresspeople to send) on an outreach campaign to that part of Michigan, and decisions like that partly explain why Harris will go down in history as the political equivalent of not having Marshawn Lynch run the ball, and the sooner some liberals and posters can accept her abortion of a campaign instead of trying to "well actually" gaslight the majority into thinking she stood for everything she didn't, the better off we'll be
