This is provably a lie.
They can end the genocide right now. Implying that they can't is trying (and failing) to provide them cover for committing a genocide. And yes, continuing to provide weapons to the grunts doing the work doesn't absolve them of the moral responsibility for it, nor does it provide them enough cover to pretend that genocide isn't the outcome they want.
So... Both parties then?
Edit: both parties support this genocide 100%.
If you want to differentiate between Trump and Harris, you need to use a different policy position to do so. Gaza isn't it.
This isn't 'A cousin' situation.
I have multiple friends who've lost the entirety of their extended families.
Aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and grandparents gone in a day.
The jackasses going around calling people 'entitled' for not supporting the party directly responsible for erasing their entire families from existence are entitled to be able to go through life with absolutely no empathy or imagination.
... How many villages in southern Lebanon has the IDF captured, again?
Let me guess, you think declaring victory and running away in 2006 meant they won, right?
Man, you should talk to Emperor Gowron. You guys share some ideas.
Edit: and no, cutting edge weapons systems on the Iranian/Russian side have not been used. The west would literally salivate at the opportunity to get some real world data on the S500.
Also, the purpose of American weapons systems is not to be the best. The purpose is to be an expensive and effective way to funnel middle class money to the stock holders of Boeing and Raytheon. Good military systems are as effective as they need to be while being cheap enough to manufacture in large numbers. An anti missle defense system that costs 2 million per missile intercepted when the missiles themselves cost 10 - 100k is an absolute failure, even if it intercepts everything it targets.
Frankly, the country with the most impressive drone program in the world is Yemen.
The only gymnastics someone is doing here is trying to tie a stupid domestic politician to a much greater foreign policy evil THAT HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH. He also didn't have anything to do with the Armenian genocide, and bringing him up in that context would be as relevant as bringing him up in this context.
Again, this isn't hard to understand.
....
RFK Jr. Is a crazy fuck. He also isn't relevant to this topic at all.
Bringing him up in this context is literally providing cover to the people responsible for this moral failure, and tying it to someone who, while bad and crazy, has no particular relationship to this topic.
This isn't hard to understand.
This forum is all the better because it doesn't have genocide justifying fascist scum on it.
You didn't say anything that would make anyone think. You posted rants about how ignorant people who responded to you were while ignoring not just their valid points but all of their points.
You are a failure morally. You're also a failure at arguing. You wouldn't convince anyone that didn't already agree with you in the first place. If you're posting with the hope of having any impact on the minds of others I would suggest you don't even bother. You're just wasting everyone's time.
Most people that claim they will move haven't actually looked at what is required from other countries and wouldn't be accepted If they tried to move.
I think you meant CIA, as mentioned by others.
Are the tankies in the room with us right now?
Do you know what a tankie is other than 'someone to the left of genocide'?
I'd bet money you voted against measure 117.