Some more history on her support for Israel:
- Supports Israel’s right-wing government and cozies up to AIPAC
- Co-sponsored resolution against Obama in support of illegal settlements, does not support Palestinian rights
- Calls BDS “anti-semitic”.
- Another Anti-Palestine rant at AIPAC, 2.
OK all those articles are 5+ years old, what have you got for current positions? Seems like Harris has been speaking out more often in support of Gaza and has even refused to meet with Netanyahu. Even back in March she was speaking critically of Israel.
Meanwhile Trump constantly waffles on the issue while refusing to actually make a choice. Of course he has a history of absolute support for Israel, and has told donors that if he's reelected he would completely crush all protests that support Palestinians.
So what exactly are you trying to do here? Point out that both candidates have shown support for Israel in the past? Call attention to Trump's continued recent support for Israel and stated position of stamping out domestic protests while taking away even more rights of US citizens? It seems pretty obvious to me that if you want anything at all to change around Gaza, there is only one candidate who has even shown compassion for their position this year.
You wanna revise this at all? Took literally 2 days for you to be proven wrong, even after we gave you evidence of years of her support for Israel.
There was reason to have a moment of hope, but she fell in line with all the other politicians. Still doesn't change the fact that Trump has exactly the same position, so we really can't separate the candidates based on their stance of genocide... Unless you also want to bring Ukraine into the discussion, where Trump has previously stated he would end all support for Ukraine and back Russia's genocide.
https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/0f2cab72-9877-406b-bb78-a939d6a7051a.png?thumbnail=1500&format=webp
I'm here to watch you move the goalposts.
Naw, moving the goalposts is totally a Republican move. She changed her stance and "fell in line" with all the other politicians. I'm disappointed, but I can't say I'm surprised.
She is running for president of the United States. What most call the most powerful office in the world. Biden has been using that position to participate in genocide. And your argument for her is that she may have said some vague thing that you can't even quote?
Has she said what she's going to do with possibly the most power someone can have in the world? Has she said what actual, tangible, actionable plan she supports? Has she said why Netanyahu is bad? And what about the rest of his ethnostate that agrees with him on the need for an ethnostate?
Nothing will change because of Kamala. She's a Democrat and takes AIPAC money. It's like saying a logger is going to stop deforestation.
We have her speech from March
Most discussions this week seem to indicate she won't deviate far from Biden's actions, although she is one of the few politicians who has so critically talked about Israel's genocide. Honestly I don't expect any politician to have the balls to speak too strongly against Israel, but even if she just stands firm on what she's said so far it would already be an improvement from current policy. However it's only been a couple days since the whole race changed, so I'm not sure she's released much of anything yet on what her position as Presidential candidate will be in any subject. Who knows, maybe nothing will change, or maybe we'll only see very slight changes.
My main issue for speaking out here is that OP and several others have been continuously posting articles to show the absolute worst of the Democratic candidates, while completely ignoring all the ways in which Trump has been the same or far worse. If you make a post that one candidate is bad for a list of reasons, without also pointing out that the other candidate is bad for doing exactly the same thing, then you are obviously just trolling for Trump and not trying to "provide unbiased information". What I'm trying to point out in my response above is that at least Harris has spoken against Israel and in favor of ending the genocide, while Trump's only statement on the issue has been that Israel needs to get in there and "finish the job".
Oh yes, I'm very biased. Biased against genocide. I hate anyone who does it, or defends people doing it.
This may blow your mind, but there are people who have actual principles in this world. Like feel strongly enough about genocide to just point at someone planning to perform genocide and say, "wow, that's bad" with no equivocation. You do not want to do that.
What Trump will or won't do doesn't change anything. Kamala has not publicly rescinded her islamophobic statements, recanted her support for an ethnostate, or made any tangible criticism of Israel. Anyone who votes for her is doing so with full knowledge that she will participate in genocide. And you aren't even denying it.
Oh I agree that some people are willing to stand up to their principals. Unfortunately the US is a two-party system, and nobody in either of those parties appear to have a spine against Israel. In any other reality I would be all for shaming Harris for being pretty much the same thing, but in our particular hellscape I have to at least give her credit for saying something that nobody else (of those two parties) running for President has done. It's a very small step, but it's still a step in the right direction. Hopefully we get a chance to allow her to move the line even further.
She re-affirmed every position she had a few years ago. What makes you think her position has changed in any way?
Source?
Source? As her party clarified in the image above, the only reason is because she's in a different city, not because of any refusal.
Here's a couple quick discussions about Harris's current position on Gaza: https://time.com/7001874/kamala-harris-donald-trump-biden-gaza/ https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/harris-may-willing-criticize-netanyahu-biden-rcna162954
And yep, a little more checking about refusing to meet with Netanyahu does actually come back to what happened this week. I thought I had seen something about a actual refusal earlier this Spring but I can't find it again so that was probably a mis-read on my part.
The NBC one cites a random person from a think-tank, not her own words or actions. The article is forced to concede: