this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2024
142 points (92.8% liked)

politics

19088 readers
3753 users here now

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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Do we actually know that Kamala would be any better for Gaza than Trump? Because Biden never altered a single Trump policy when it came to Israel. He enabled Israel just as strong as Trump did.

Moreover, Trump has told Israel that he wants them to wrap it up quickly. That likely means a surge in violence in Gaza in the next few months. And while the death toll from those months will exceed what they would have been under Kamala, the conflict had no end in sight at all under Biden/Harris.

What evidence do we actually have, other than just vibes, that Trump will be worse than Harris? I mean sure, he personally despises all Arab people, but it's not like Biden or Harris really see the Palestinians as human beings either. Trump is just more overt about it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Do we actually know that Kamala would be any better for Gaza than Trump?

Given that Israel just announced a plan to annex the West Bank with Trump's blessing, I'd say the answer is that yes, she would.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That isn't something new. They've been annexing land in the West Bank for years.

It may accelerate under Trump, but it's nothing new.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Which still leads to the same answer though. Yes, Harris would have at least been better for them because Israel would have moved much more slowly. Had Israel believed they could have sped things up under Biden, they'd have done it over a year ago.

I'm not saying either was particularly "good" for Palestine. But Harris would have still been better than Trump. Look at it this way. Your landlord comes by tomorrow and says you have six months to move out. Or he comes by and says you're moving out tomorrow. (Legal issues aside. It's an example. I'm sure you get my point). Which one is better for you? At least with the former you have six months with a roof over your head.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

There is no "legal issues aside". The landlord had his buddy in government change the rules.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Do we actually know that Kamala would be any better for Gaza than Trump?

1000% yes and I don't believe you're really asking

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ok. What is Trump going to do that Biden hasn't already been doing? Everything I've seen is that nothing will change except perhaps an acceleration. Whether Gaza is genocided in 1 year or 3 is pretty irrelevant.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I already said I don't think you're asking so why would I volunteer to be sealioned for 30 minutes about public information, most of which direct quotes from trump that we all know about?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I've seen those stories, but again, I really don't see anything Trump will do that Harris wouldn't have.

The big claim is that he's going to allow Israel to annex land in the West Bank. But that's been going on for years.

What about annexing land in Gaza? Well, Biden's sat by while the entirety of north Gaza is now actively being ethnically cleansed. The Israeli military has declared any remaining civilians in the area to be enemy fighters and valid targets. There are hundreds of thousands of people dead.

That is what Biden has sat by and abetted. And the big fear is that Trump might sit back while Israel annexes North Gaza? I'm sorry, but why would you think Biden wouldn't allow it? Annexing is just filing some paperwork. Hundreds of thousands have been massacred. Emptying a land of its people is a far, far greater a crime than filing some paperwork to formally annex it later. If Biden didn't have a problem with full-on ethnic cleansing, he is not going to lift a finger to prevent Netanyahu from filing some paperwork. He's already tolerated the greater crime, he won't suddenly move to stop a lesser one.

I have certainly heard things that Trump will do. But they honestly don't seem any worse than what is already happening. I think the only real difference is optics. The key difference between Biden and Trump is that Trump is an overt racist. Trump overtly hates all Muslims; he doesn't even try to hide it. And because of this, we assume that Trump will be worse for Gaza than Biden has been. But on closer inspection, there really isn't much more that Trump can do that Biden hasn't already been doing. Biden already has the "US support to Israel" dial set to 100%. It simply doesn't go any higher.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah he sat by. Trump will almost definitely encourage and support it fully.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago

Literally not what I said but okay

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It would have been better because like her hero Biden, she would have quietly said Netty was mean behind closed doors.

She would have kept sending guns and money, and defending them from repercussions so they continue to have free rein to commit genocide, but it would be better.