The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
Occupation Law prohibits an occupying power from initiating armed force against its occupied territory. By mere virtue of the existence of military occupation, an armed attack, including one consistent with the UN Charter, has already occurred and been concluded. Therefore the right of self-defense in international law is, by definition since 1967, not available to Israel with respect to its dealings with real or perceived threats emanating from the West Bank and Gaza Strip population. To achieve its security goals, Israel can resort to no more than the police powers, or the exceptional use of militarized force, vested in it by IHL. This is not to say that Israel cannot defend itself—but those defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defense in international law. As explained by Ian Scobbie:
To equate the two is simply to confuse the legal with the linguistic denotation of the term ”defense.“ Just as ”negligence,“ in law, does not mean ”carelessness” but, rather, refers to an elaborate doctrinal structure, so ”self-defense” refers to a complex doctrine that has a much more restricted scope than ordinary notions of ”defense.“
To argue that Israel is employing legitimate “self-defense” when it militarily attacks Gaza affords the occupying power the right to use both police and military force in occupied territory. An occupying power cannot justify military force as self-defense in territory for which it is responsible as the occupant. The problem is that Israel has never regulated its own behavior in the West Bank and Gaza as in accordance with Occupation Law.
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
I'll tell you what, my propaganda detector has become MUCH more sensitive in the last few years of social media. By which I mean: almost every bit of news I see on SoMe about what is going on in Gaza is obvious bullshit intended to rile folks up, one way or the other.
That said, I firmly believe the government of Israel's response to October 7 has been far too aggressive and destructive to human life.
There may be some BS in social media about Gaza, but its hard to dispute the accounts of on-the-ground reporters (about 80 of whom have been killed by Israel already). And yes "the right of Israel to protect itself" has been taken a bit too far by some (ie the US Government)
Being neutral is certainly “safe” in some ways, but it’s not morally correct regardless of who you piss off.
Nov 22, 23 4:23 am ·
·
BulgarBlogger's comment has been hidden
View comment
BulgarBlogger
One of the disadvantages of posting your real views with your real name is that in this case, I am pretty sure you put off all my wealthy Jewish clientele. Careful how you respond. I’m Jewish, and depending on your response, I may bring a very similar attention to that response to what Musk got after his tweet…
Nov 22, 23 4:25 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Interesting how criticizing the literal genocide being committed by Israel is somehow tantamount to antisemitism.
no genocide being committed. Israel is not out to eradicate the palestinian people. i know that's what you want to believe, but that's not what is happening. Just like taking a dose of chemo is about killing the cancer, not the whole
organism.
Nov 22, 23 1:41 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
That you used cancer. Interesting, and on brand choice.
Here's what's weird. We know Nazis committed genocide, we know of genocidal acts of Japan, and killing of civilians but all parties in the war. We've rightly condemned those actions, they were both aggressors - despite what we know about the acts by western governments after WWI against Germany - and yet almost no one says Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified, or that those German civilians had it coming in Dresden. These were just as valid for war crimes, but when you're the "victor", or loser as in Vietnam, the terms get dictated by western powers.
Bulgar, I don’t have any issue with the people of Israel. I *am* against how much bombing of innocent people the government of Israel (aided by the US) is doing. Does that make me antisemitic, or a mealy-mouthed white liberal, or both, or what? I really struggle with the language here. What does “pro-Israel “ mean?
Against both sides? How diplomatic of you. Hamas attacked Israel and there is the "neutral" argument. Hilarious. When terrorists hide behind human shields, it is better to get rid of the terrorists at all costs. Its like a cancer. You either eradicate it completely despite harming good cells, or you deal with it bit by bit until it comes back stronger and stronger and eventually kills you. Am I sad innocent people are getting hurt? Of course, I'm not a monster. But I think what is happening is absolutely necessary for the better future in long run of the region.
Bother sides have been / are being genocidal monsters.
I can't support either and want to see both stopped. I do find it odd that some people are basically saying 'well my side is being less of a genocidal monster so they're the one you should side with'
I know several of you here will say 'yeah but look at what this side did - the other side is better' Or 'well this side has a right to ...' That's a foolish and narrow minded argument meant to promote 'your' side and lessen you of any guilt. Both sides have done / continue to do horrible things. Neither side deserves support.
God forbid you get sick of cancer... I don't want to hear you crying to the doctors (or others) about the morality of why chemo is harming your good cells...
Israel's response is entirely appropriate and is akin to dosing a terrorist regime with the equivalent of chemotherapy. Hopefully the Palestinian organism can persevere without terrorist CELLS (pun intended)
Hamas is a cancer. So is Israel's response to Hamas. You wouldn't give yourself cancer to fight the cancer you already have. All that will happen is you die of cancer.
Nov 22, 23 2:39 pm ·
·
BulgarBlogger
Really? Israel's response is a cancer? I can't debate with a pacifist. That's what you are.
I wouldn’t say I’m a pacifist but I do think both sides are being evil. I want innocent people to not be killed or terrorized or starved to death. That’s it.
ButtheadBlogger, "Hamas is a cancer that must be eliminated all costs." ( Why not ask for U.S. assistance with vaporizing weapon targets with those laser devices? ) Why not just send in a team of soldiers to shoot the Hamas bad guys? Why not a more surgical strategy than just sending missiles?
There's better more targeted approaches than what is being done right now.
My take is the Hamas et al are bad guys in this situation as well as Israel. The only 'good guys' are the innocent non-combatants... often the victims in this bullshit conflict that should never have happened at all. After U.S. gets any American hostage out, it should stay out of the conflict. However, U.N. may be involved but the U.S. should stay out of it. We are not wanted and U.S. and UK should stay out of it. We made the mess by creating Israel in the first place as Israel had been defeated and destroyed as a country for centuries. Our continued involvement is just going to be a flipping the bird to Islam as insensitively imposing the creation of Israel was. This does not mean it should prevent volunteers from U.S. to fight. Officially, we should stay out of the dispute. The UN with non-US, international interest should lead an UN involvement in the matters. U.S. interest should be limited to valid national security interest of the U.S. and American non-combatants. Volunteer American citizens that are combatants shall understand they are taking this high risk voluntarily without expectation on U.S. intervention. I think U.S. should minimize its role after the American hostages are released. If Israel and Palestine goes to full on war, it is their program. War itself is ugly. Some can say war is a humanitarian crime. However, we are no saints and we are not the parties with legitimacy for peace making. We are warmongering barbarians. All we do is make things more heated. We should keep our eyes open and watch for any nuclear weapon deployment or other use of WMDs or even the hint of actual intent to use. We should otherwise stay out of it. We are not the world's police, we should discontinue acting like it. Our own country needs attention to addressing its own internal issues.
Yes and no. If you create the problem, shouldn't you be responsible for helping to clean it up? On the other side of the coin, the US sticks its face where it doesn't belong continually, and this time it's wearing thin.
I think y'all already know my thoughts on this, but just to add some hard data:
TL;DR: This long statement effectively demonstrates the systematic removal, displacement, and murder of Palestinians by Israel and its western allies.
Israel continues to celebrate the Nakba, an event in the late 1940s which ethnically cleansed 700,000 Palestinian people (via forceful expulsion from their homes in what would later become Israel's land). Israeli historians have debated about whether this is considered "ethnic cleansing", but have since legitimized some of it as "partial ethnic cleansing".
As a result of the 1947-49 war, Palestine (long established as a state, with its own flag, governing body, etc.) was partitioned out by the UN in order to give now-vacated (read: ethnically cleansed) land to the state of Israel, wherein the remainder of in-situ Palestinians either moved or were forced into Gaza. On and off for decades since, Israel has switched between abandoning and blockading, completely bombarding, and otherwise violently antagonizing the Gaza Strip with a lot of financial help from the United States and other parties.
Of course, the nature of a self-governing Palestine in Gaza—along with the notion of a functioning military, agencies, etc.—is half-lying anyway. The Gaza strip was heavily controlled directly by Egyptian forces starting in 1949 until 1967, when it saw its current occupation by Israel.
To suggest that this is a war between two equally bad and competent nation-states entirely denies the fact that Palestine has not had a functioning state for decades, being beholden to whatever agreements other nations came up with. Hamas began in the 1960s under Israeli occupation as an insurgency group (and admittedly was anti-semitic). Its mission statement has, in more recent years, been entirely re-written to specifically direct that Hamas is fighting against the state of Israel, and not on the premise of Judaism as an international group of people.
If you would play the "both sides are bad" argument about Israel and Palestine, I wonder if you'd do the same about the Jewish armed resistance in Warsaw in 1943; or the Sioux and Cheyenne violent resistance against the United States in the 1870s; or the Haitian Slave Revolt in the 1790s; or... the list goes on and on. Violent revolt against oppressors does not make both sides equally bad. If you think that, I'd wager that you've never felt the hand of violent oppression, and are just speaking out of turn.
Neither side and no side should have claim to that area. It doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the divine which they believe in... which by the way is the same being or character although from their own perspectives.They can't learn to share the sandbox with each other like good little children learned to do in preschool and elementary school. They can't bother themselves to live together without trying to kill each other. They aren't willing so maybe they both should be evicted and spend a 1000 years (nice religious number) exiled to learn to live peaceful with one another. If they can't, it be extended for another 1000 years until they give up the hatred to each other and the bullshit. Act like bad little children then be treated as such. There holy book all speaks to compassion and love and to care for one another. What is so damn hard about that. Kids learn to do this. What is so fucked up in their heads that they can't do what little 6 year olds have learned to do?
You don't see white people scalping the heads of native Americans, today, do you? U.S. was bad guys in that story. However, there were bad actors on both sides. That is with any war. This is why there should be one human race nation but no land ownership. As we all are just tenants as mortal race. We should have one nation. If we don't, we must forget the knowledge of everything we learned in the age of civilization and return to the way we lived in the days before the ice age and how we were in equilibrium with nature. No guns. No missiles and rockets. No bombs. Just spears and such basic stone age Era tools we used to survive, hunt, etc. Learn to be one nation of the human race living and coexisting together with all our cultural differences and beliefs or return to stone age Era of living. I prefer a United Earth nation with regional, subpolitical bodies but federated into unity for the common good of humanity.
As you see, I personally believe these kinds of issues should be resolved in peace. I think Israel and the Hamas have been acting in malice. In my opinion, the U.S. should not be involved. Why? By creating Israel (with the UK), we messed with the meddled into affairs we shouldn't have. Until we created Israel as a country, Israel didn't exist as a country or kingdom in like a 1000 years. The last King of Israel died, when? After the Romans, then time under Egypt, Ottoman, etc. simply put there was no Israel. There were people but no nation. It was just land under the governance of others without even its own government. Romans allowed Israel to maintain some level of self-governance under Roman oversight. However, in the centuries after that Jesus figure's time, Israel kingdom was completely crushed and eradicated and then occupied by others since with many Jews in exile for 1000 years. Many settled in parts of Europe. Then the arrogant U.S. and UK in their haughty attitude insensitively imposed the creation of Israel. Yes, I see the issues the Palestinians and others in the immediate region had. Many in this region were Islamic and non-Islamic "Arabic" (non-Jews) people (not sure of all the terms for the various groups and their identities so bear with me, I don't mean any insult) people. While there were some Jews that still maintained their beliefs, they were a minority. Then a great multitude of Jews from Europe and elsewhere began migrating to the newly formed Israel. Granted, the number of Jews from abroad were larger in numbers than any time in history of Israel kingdom. However, these Jews are largely mixed with non-Jews like Europeans. There is an unforgiven issue by pretty much the whole Palestinean people and to an extent the people of Jordan by the very imposed creation of Israel. This hatred was seen beyond that immediate area of the middle east but many Islamic people of the middle east. This is why we became targets by Islamic terrorist groups since the 1960s. It is the Judeo-Christian cabal they called infidels that spearheaded the creation of Israel. So there is this dynamic and hatred on that side. Then of course the multitude of promises and claims. Now, after 50+ years, both sides been doing wrong to each other that there isn't even clean hands or innocence on the factions. They are bad to each other and bad neighbors. They shouldn't be neighbors anymore and both sides should leave. Leaving the land back to the divine Lord. Right now, it's a complete mess. The last people to be involved in settling the dispute is Americans. Once American hostages and Americans are returned back to U.S. (including those who died), U.S. should just butt out and leave this dispute to resolve itself or addressed by UN. This is part of what UN was established for, in the first place.
I also fundamentally disagree with the title and sentiment of this thread... Israeli's are NOT committing genocide against Palestinians. They are not out to ERADICATE the Palestinian people. That is ridiculous. Read my comment above about chemotherapy and cancer. Shame on the OP. This is a war, and as a Jew, I can tell you that we all have to pick sides and in this case, 99% of Jews are firmly united in support of Israel. We can and will utilize our influence as a successful nation to fight back against messages like this. Careful of the consequences.
That's cool, your logic and language is extremely similar to that of other genocides where "Chemotherapy is used to cure the Cancer". You may know they have targeted chemo also these days, but thats beside the point.
Is that the excuse Israelis use to settle into the West Bank as well? Are the harmless civilians there also akin to "Cancer" to them that they need to cleanse the land of?
The latest info shows about 14,000 Palestinians killed (thus far) for 1,200 Israelis. That is around 12 Brown/Arab lives for one Israeli person. So yeah it is pretty clear who is trying to eradicate the other group.
As for consequences, bring it on. And as a Athiest/agnostic, I have picked a side and its NOT yours, Bulgar. I also laud various countries like South Africa kicking out your Israeli diplomats. I wish other had the same spine.
Here's my diplomatic solution, both sides solve there disputes diplomatically in peaceful and civil manner or we kick both sides out. Knock off this inheritance feud that is what both sides deep down is about claims and hatred over disputes of inheritance since fucking Abraham. They are your fucking cousins. They are part of his descendants at least in part where there lineage traces back to. I'm pretty certain this land gift is so you ultimately share the gift showing compassion and love. Jess were in large part responsible for that great flood and nearly being smited by God. Right? Stop fucking up and share the sandbox peacefully because really, it doesn't belong to you. The divine Lord of all created the Earth and everything on Earth and the cosmos. You belong to God. They belong to God. Learn to live together or lose it. Remember the exiles. You lost it like what was it... over 1000 years ago. If you want U.S. and the UK, we should kick both the whole lot out and send them to exile... a great Exodus. Start looking at the issue from that perspective. Behave and live respectfully to each other, celebrate your religious beliefs and heritage in peace. Otherwise, exodus to all of you for the next 1,000 to 10,000 years. How's that for diplomacy.
Just because Israel is more effective at mass killing (given they been weaponized, a good part from the U.S. in the beginning and intermittently over the decades), it doesn't mean there isn't bad actors on the Palestinian side engaged in wrong doing. I see both sides are bad. However, U.S. is NOT the face to be spearheading the peace. We're tainted, and our weapon technology has been employed in this atrocity. So it really should be UN and other leading nations other than U.S. and UK because we're part of the guilt behind this. If we didn't create Israel, this would not have occurred. We planted this unholy seed of disruption. It is precisely the reason why I think U.S. should become more insular and get out of the affairs of other countries and take care of itself. Certain, not THE face. We should not be involved except as members of the UN. We should take a more muted or quiet role and not be leading any spearheaded effort on this and future matters in the middle east. It is just wasting our tax dollars getting militarily involved in these matters. Even diplomatically, we should be "star actors" in the diplomacy of these issues. Our country has neglected itself and its own people for too long.
Yeah, that is the only recourse you have - threatening to quiet people using popular elitist sentiment that is no longer valid in 2023. Same reason why most of Hollywood and Architectural literati are mum.
Extremely sad that you dont have the cojones to debate this out and threaten to cancel a whole forum. Yuck.
No one is propagating terrorists. Didnt you just validate the Israeli genocide by saying that like in Chemo, innocent people have to die for the sake of destroying a few cancer cells ? Or are we going back on that.
Indeed, most of the world, except for Israel, the US and UK are on one side (saying that your peeps are committing genocide). But yeah carry on your narrative, it is not easy to keep fooling people for ever and ever.
Nope. Again, genocide is the intent to completely eradicate an entire group of people. That is neither the case or intent here. Unless you admit that all palestinians are hamas... something I and 99% of Jews and Israelis disagree with.
Nov 22, 23 2:14 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
So how many of the 14k civilians killed were Hamas, do you care to expound? pretty certain that the 5k babies were not, for sure.
No, you send troops and take surgical military operations that are much more precise than missiles and their explosives. You can precision shoot a Hamas in the head between the eyes with sniper training. The missile blows up the building or portion of it killing everyone in the blast radius. A gun would be more precise. IDF should be adequately trained to do that just fine to go after Hamas (combatants). Babies are not. That's a war crime. Especially in the whole context of the situation in mind. It isn't Vietnam where a child is strapped with a bomb and sent towards American troops and then detonated (often remote detonated) when American troops gets close. In that case, you would shoot the child with the bomb, unfortunately because there is no saving them unless you can stop the combatant with the remote detonator. It depends on all factors and not an easy decision to live with. On the other hand, what this appears to be happening in the area there is particularly atrocious.
So... after a few days, we get a few handfuls of reasonable points of view, one reasonably terse Balkins comment, and the ramblings of a disconnected fuck. Not bad, all things considered.
or maybe I'll have some of my Jewish and Israeli friends do it for me. Already reached out. Sayonara you terrorist lovers! Don't poke the bear. Many are in real estate. Great way to piss off clients, Chad.
Go ahead. I've made it quite clear that I don't like what either side is doing or has done. Both need to stop the killing.
How about this BulgarBlogger
- tell us your real name and where you work. I'd think you'd be proud to publicly share your views on this subject. I know I am am.
If he supports his views that much, let him. He should with his own name and stand behind it. I don't hate Jews. I don't hate Palestineans.
I think the situation is, they both are doing wrong to each other and other are not really acting in good faith. Israel is excessively killing Palestinians and I don't support that act. I also don't support the manner in how Palestinians groups done some of what they done. I think the U.S. should, as soon as we get our Americans back (living and those that died), we should take a backseat with the international community with UN to intervene in diplomatic resolve to put an end to this.
We should let the international community arbitrate and resolve the issues and work to bring peace back while we stand off to the sidelines and with NATO and U.S. resources in place to protect the neighboring countries from any incidental fallout of the war.
If the war happens and can't be peaceably resolved, then as an international community (not just a U.S. intervention but a large scale international community), we take steps to put an end to any tyranny on either or both sides. However, this lead should not be U.S. or UK. It should be EU and other members of the international community (UN).
Almost no one has written anything to get them doxxed, with the exception being you. No one needs to apologize for definitions defined by international bodies, and laws, written specifically to address what Nazis did. Now, you may find it "objectionable" but I for one don't care what you think. Everyone in the world could condemn what the terrorist group Hamas did, and zionists like you, Reverend John Agee, and the fascist Netanyahoo, would still justify your genocide of innocent Palestinians.
I am glad BulshitBlogger said what they did. It is how a lot of cancel culture operates these days, and whom it favors. With Ukraine it was fashionable to rally against Russia, but with Israel it is totally inconvenient.
Perhaps the reason why a lot of Hollywood "Activists" are completely silent. Not that our words count for much, but there's not a single Architect (with a capital A) that has even denounced any of this carnage.
Can I? (under the flags of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [including Greenland]) I, Richard Balkins, Architect (in the countries of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [including Greenland]), DENOUNCE this carnage and hostile conflict by Israel and Palestinian groups that are harming, injuring, and killing innocent non-combatants and the atrocities that have been occurring including hostage-taking of non-combatants. I implore both sides to discontinue the hostility and carnage on innocent non-combatants. I implore compassion and care and genuine resolve for peace.
[Disclaimer: No claim to Architect license or offering of architectural services in countries and states/provinces where licensure is required]
Passports and visas are obvious stuff I would have to go on-site for on-site work. I don't have to be in Scandinavia to prepare do most of the work of actually preparing the technical submissions
.
Ok, visit vs work, okay. There is a point where a visa isn't needed so yes. I was too busy at the moment for a more detailed answer on that but I agree. So it depends how long I am there over a time period. Going there to visit that comes at a cost factor that needs to be accounted for in billing and in contract. You don't play cheap ass if you have to make several plane flight trips there. It also makes sense to use today's technology.
Unless we're redefining the word genocide, I can't help but feel this position is coming from a place of bad faith. Its fairly simple to understand that if Israel wanted to perpetuate genocide of the Palestinians, it could do that easily, tomorrow.
I realize these are the tactics of an ideology that replaces basic ideas of good and evil and reduces all of the worlds conflicts with a simplistic and intellectually lazy framework: the powerful (bad), and the powerless (good). Once framed this way, the "correct" position becomes obvious: Israel, racist oppressors. Palestinians: noble victims. Intentions be damned. Inconvenient truths be ignored. We will bend all language and facts to fit.
Chad: Think you meant Palestinians there bud, not Pakistani.
Shakey: Please enlighten me as to what the "intentions" of the state of Israel are... from where I stand, Israel has been forcibly removing Palestinians from their land, eradicating them with missiles and guns, and even knifing them in the streets, for over 70 years.
Why are you the one to define "genocide" when there has been nearly 70 years of a general understanding, and accepted definition of the term? "Ongoing Genocide" is what this is, ethnic cleansing, it's already exceeded the toll of The Nakba.
"Its fairly simple to understand that if Israel wanted to perpetuate genocide of the Palestinians, it could do that easily, tomorrow."
Wrong, they ARE doing it, today. The only reason they did not do it all these years is that a. It would seem too much like the oppressed becoming the oppressor and b. A slow death furthers their military ambitions, as well as warmongers like the US. With the combo of Netanyahu and Genocide Joe, they are proceeding with what they set out 75 years ago.
what do you suppose should happen to the people of Israel if the state of Israel were not to exist? I understand the argument from the Palestinian perspective, and the argument that Israel’s tactics to eliminate hamas are not surgical and seemingly careless, but it’s ridiculous and naive to think that Israel’s can live in harmony with ultra conservative Islamic states on all sides without being persecuted and falling victim to genocide. They are literally saying what they would do to the Jews, and woke Americans are like “nah they don’t mean it” Make no mistake, to support the eradication of Israel is tantamount to supporting the eradication of the Jews and homosexuals and other minorities of the region. You people seem to forget that the Jews are the minority in the region by a long shot. This in no way is to justify the killing of Palestinian civilians. That is unequivocally wrong. I think disagreeing with both sides in one way or another is the only rational and ethical stance. This false dichotomy that we must choose a side is foolish and destructive. I choose the side of good humans regardless of nationality. I choose to criticize both regimes for their share of wrongdoing.
Nov 30, 23 12:28 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
No one says that Israel should not exist. But they should do so in peace and solidarity with their neighbors (the palestinians). There's no need for settler violence and appropriation of lands, something that the Isralies are doing all the time.
The consistent gaslighting is enraging. As SOD says, and many of my close Jewish friends say, Israel has no right to continually expand into lands set aside for Palestine. Conflating Israeli colonialism with anti-Semitism may be convenient and make you feel justified but it is in no way accurate.
Many people are saying that Israel should not exist. You may not be saying that, but that’s the dominant belief in the region, and literally in the constitution of Hamas. That is one reality - a Nazi like Frankenstein threat. The other reality is that Isreal is / has treated the Palestinians terribly for decades. One thing doesn’t justify the other. I don’t have to side with the bloods or the crips regardless of who is doing worse things. I can simply denounce gang violence and denounce both sides for their specific roles in the situation. We have too many folks denying reality and deluding themselves to support one side or the other side. Overall, my allegiance is to innocent people regardless of their nationality, and to the western liberal values that actually allow for a multi-cultural state of peace - like we have relatively achieved in the US and some of Europe.
It's been said by many others; Israel can either be a Jewish state, or a Democracy, it can't be both. If it wants to be a like their neighbors, state that you're a theocratic ethnostate. The only solution is a one state, pluralistic democracy.
b3tadine[sutures], Western colonialism is not the only form of colonialism. Have you ever looked at a map of the Arab world? Who would you rather be colonized by?
Really? That's hill you want to die on? My government is supporting this genocide, my imperialist war machine. Let's focus, ok?
Dec 1, 23 11:10 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
The waters become muddy when we apply certain standards to some groups and not to others. I can without hesitation criticize the US foreign policy and Israel’s policies past and present. Many on the left however have a difficult time criticizing the PLO, Hamas, Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Iran. Last I checked Egypt shares a border with Gaza too. No peace and progress in the region can ever happen until we hold all peoples and cultures to the same standards. That of course includes holding the Israelis and US responsible for killings of civilians. I would agree that Israel is doing something akin to a “oops I did genocide”. They are using Hamas as a justification to pummel Gaza and collectively punish the people. I have no problem at all criticizing that. Many folks however have this warped notion that de-colonization is a justification for violence. Being that colonization and imperialism has been a continuous and universal force of human civilizations nearly any violence can be justified if we do enough mental gymnastics. This is a very dangerous path to go down.
Dec 1, 23 11:43 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
But yes, western liberals
values
Dec 1, 23 11:57 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
But yes, western liberals
values are absent in most of the Arab world. I don’t think we need to spread those values like some evangelicals, but we also need to recognize that the average Israeli probably doesn’t want to integrate their nation with a nation that doesn’t share these values. Can you understand that perspective?
::snip:: "Many on the left however have a difficult time criticizing the PLO, Hamas, Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Iran." ::snip::
I criticize all of those groups and I'm an evil socialist Liberal.
Dec 1, 23 12:11 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Frank, that is squarely an Israeli problem. There are many multi-dimensional and multivalent cultures in the world. If Israel wants to impose their values on their neighbors, it is the definition of OPPRESSION.
Oh, and Frank, you should be ashamed of being a Zionist sympathizer at this moment. I know I would be, even if I was a liberal Israeli. I can only hope that History will not be on your side.
I'm firmly on the side with anyone rebelling against a fascist regime. Be they Nat Turner, John Brown, IRA, ANC, Indigenous People, or groups fighting for the liberation of the Palestinian people. All the groups I've cited have a shared struggle, and that is undeniable. All The Power To All The People.
b3tadine[sutures], there are other ways to fight oppression. I prefer the way of Ghandi, MLK, and Mandela. Historically those tactics have been more productive than any violent uprising. Furthermore, any man who supports the systematic rape of women and slaughter of children in their beds is not a man worthy of my time. I applaud Chad and others for having the courage to criticize both sides for their evils and to try to understand multiple perspectives. Chad, by “left” I’m referring to the new left that seems to view everything in terms of oppressor and oppressed. The world is far more complicated than that, and the Jews have a deep history of being oppressed and are surrounded by people who want to kill them. I can’t not sympathize with the anxiety that must create. Imagine if all of your neighbors wanted to kill you because you are whatever you are. That would certainly compel me to fortify my home. AGAIN - none of that justifies the way Israel is handling this war. I am not supporting it. I understand the root of the anger from both sides. I don’t understand the targeting of civilians from both sides. All I have to say on the topic.
Dec 1, 23 3:16 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
For the record b3tadine[sutures] I’m not saying that you do support Hamas. I don’t know what you support. I’m speaking generally to the folks who are literally saying that Hamas is justified in their actions.
Dec 1, 23 3:17 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Mandela is an interesting choice. He was in prison for 27 years, openly advocated for uprising, was considered a terrorist but the western powers, and in America, until 2008.
Palestinians, in 2018, in the March of The Return, peacefully protested at the wall of their open air prison, and were gunned down.
MLK, wasn't completely on board with passivism, in fact without Malcolm, he wouldn't have achieved what he did, and people still were murdered.
Gandhi, was the only one you mentioned that lived his values, but even then, people were needlessly murdered, and he was dealing with dying empire.
Palestinians have no advocate. No western power, when they should have our backing.
Dec 1, 23 4:14 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Mandela, go look for yourself, had openly stated that Palestine, and her people, were justified in their actions.
And again, Nat Turner, John Brown and the Abolitionists were right, and no one, not one person who is American would ever say their revolt was wrong.
Dec 1, 23 4:20 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Yes, Gandhi was probably the most non-violent of them all, but yes he was dealing with the dying british empire who were already weakened by WW2. No the case with Israel, which grows stronger and stronger with ardent support from the US (i.e. my tax money used to kill babies)
I’m not against violence per se. I’m unequivocally against violence perpetrated towards civilians. That said, Israel/US should have instead assassinated all of the leadership of Hamas and the Iranians who sent orders. As a bonus, they should have destroyed Iran’s oil infrastructure to deliver a financial blow. Then surgically kill the foot-soldiers in Gaza. Then US should rebuild Gaza’s infrastructure that Hamas stole from them. Once that’s done, some sort of one or two state solution should be brokered with the US leadership. If Israel doesn’t comply, the tax payer gravy train stops. As far as I’m concerned, the US ought to be calling shots if we are writing checks. Some terms and conditions to the on going aid.
My solution? America should stop being an imperialist, genocidal power it has become. It's not in my interest, or the world's for that matter, to continue with undermining the self determination of other countries, simply because they don't support the current hegemonic structures. The reason Iran, a very modern culture, filled with beautiful and intelligent people, don't support America is because we undermined their sovereignty. Stop. FULL STOP.
I agree with that, but we don’t have the benefit of time travel, so now that the Frankenstein is on the loose what do we do?
Dec 2, 23 5:28 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
You do seem to believe in time travel. I'm dead set against bombing people, assassination as a tool for diplomacy, a lesson, we should've learned by now.
Dec 2, 23 5:39 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Diplomacy? really? With people who order rape as a tool of war? Hamas needs to be eradicated from the face of the earth. They are evil. Those who ordered the terror attacks are evil. As bad as the Nazis. I have no problem whatsoever with their assassination. Remove them in a surgical way and then the civilians of Gaza can have a chance of a decent future.
They're rebellion against an unjust occupation. If you read any of the OP, or anything else online, you'd already know that. But since you are so concerned with rape, I'm sure you'll decry the tool had been used against uncharged Palestinian hostages, by the IOF.
Dec 3, 23 3:43 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
I guess I’m old enough to have escaped the indoctrination. You are structuring your arguments on a wobbly neo-Marxist footing . That footing is fundamentally wrong and unstable. You are reducing humans to members of groups, and you are reducing all conflicts to an oppressor vs oppressed binary. In reality things are far more complex. Who is the oppressed when a mob of grown armed men break into a home rape a woman and slaughter the children in their beds in a serial killer like fervor? At that moment in time, any reasonable person would conclude that the terrorists become oppressive to the family being slaughtered. During 9-11 this was clear to everyone. Since then, something insidious took over the minds of the younger generation. The breakdown of dedication to western liberal values where the individual is the focus has led many to an inability to maintain a consistent moral conscience. Rape is bad is not controversial. To have a significant number of Americans question if rape, terror attacks, and child murder is a okay in some dynamics is very troubling. Humans are individuals first and foremost, then members of communities, then citizens of a state. A civilian is not directly responsible for the actions of their governments, and therefore is not a legitimate military target. This seems almost too obvious to even say, but
apparently it’s not anymore.
Dec 3, 23 11:42 am ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
"A civilian is not directly responsible for the actions of their governments, and therefore is not a legitimate military target. This seems almost too obvious to even say, but apparently it’s not anymore."
Am I incorrect to see the irony in this sentence, because it does seem to be lost on you altogether. Over 14,000 civilians have been murdered in 8 weeks, by the occupying force. 14000.
It also goes without saying, although it needs to be for some of us, the occupied have l few rules regulating their behavior, whereas the occupiers have many rules.
Dec 3, 23 11:47 am ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Occupation Law prohibits an occupying power from initiating armed force against its occupied territory. By mere virtue of the existence of military occupation, an armed attack, including one consistent with the UN Charter, has already occurred and been concluded. Therefore the right of self-defense in international law is, by definition since 1967, not available to Israel with respect to its dealings with real or perceived threats emanating from the West Bank and Gaza Strip population. To achieve its security goals, Israel can resort to no more than the police powers, or the exceptional use of militarized force, vested in it by IHL. This is not to say that Israel cannot defend itself—but those defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defense in international law.
Is the above written by a neo-marxist organization?
Dec 3, 23 11:52 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
This goes both ways. Israel’s careless bombardment of Gaza is also wrong. I do not believe that Israel is capable of governing in the region anymore. I believe that the entire region of Israel-Gaza-west bank should be managed by some sort of coalition government including the US, EU, and the more moderate surrounding Arab States. Rebuild Gaza and the area into something beautiful and meaningful. Let the area serve as a sort of common interest project for these states. The antidote of destruction is not truce or peace - its creation.
Dec 3, 23 11:53 am ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Who is the oppressed when slaves revolt and kill their oppressor? Who is the oppressed when indigenous peoples revolt and kill settlers? Who is oppressed when prisoners in camps revolt and kill their captors?
Dec 3, 23 11:57 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
If slaves revolt and kill their slave masters then they would be justified. If they kill the slave master’s children and rape the slave masters wife that would be unjustifiable. If some lunatic kidnapped me it would be justified for me to kill him. If I then turned the gun on his unwitting family out of pure hatred and bloodlust it would not be justified. This is not difficult to understand. Hamas didn’t attack military targets. They attacked civilians. They didn’t attack civilians by accident or in a collateral way. They targeted them in a premeditated way by orders coming from their leaders.
Dec 3, 23 12:03 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Let’s also not pretend that Hamas cares about Gaza civilians. The likely intent of the attack was to disrupt the deal between SA and Israel
Dec 3, 23 12:34 pm ·
·
ShakeyDeal
Please @b3tadine stop conflating Hama's actions with anything but a jihadist holy war. It's literally in their charter.
This resistance talk is nonsense.
Frank the fact that your Bibi (more like Bobo) ignored the intelligence warnings of the "most sophisticated intelligence in the world" likely indicates that they wanted this war to happen, so they could appropriate most of Gaza and drill their holy oil. Also, Shakey, this "jihadist war" is a result of Israel stealing all of their lands directed by the UK and other western countries. So , yes it is indeed a resistance.
I've seen stupid people who talk like the situation is a football game or something, but this guy Frank tops them all. Don't bother with this creature. He is uneducated on the subject and a stupid mouthpiece. You won't change his limited mind if there's one. Anybody who says my side is a better 'colonialist' should be thrown out of the room and asked to repeat the class.
The narrative that the west invented imperialism is laughably ahistorical. The Arabs took over - through conquest- all of North Africa and the entire region. Should the “indigenous” rebel against them? How far back do we go? Maybe we just all commit suicide and return lands to the Neanderthals and then they can return lands to the bonobos?
Dec 2, 23 3:05 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Nice, you are racist as well as stupid. Those two traits usually go hand in hand as you have illustrated.
You obviously didn’t read anything that I wrote. This is no time for lazily skimming.
Dec 4, 23 7:29 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Nothing that I wrote is at all racist in any way shape or form.
Dec 4, 23 7:30 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
But just so frustrating how dumb some folks are to think that Palestinian is a race. Virtually all people from the Mediterranean region share very similar genetics - including southern Europeans. Most of the world doesn’t view race in the ridiculously simplified American way. Many, but not all Israelis are lighter because they are Jews that came from northern regions many decades ago.
Dec 4, 23 7:35 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Wild, just wild. Zionists have been arguing the exact opposite. They claim a right to Palestine that goes back 2000 years. And virtually everyone that has more than one braincell has been arguing, not 2000 years, not 500 years, not even 200 years - albeit some, including myself have been arguing this issue is measurably 100 years old - 75 years in the making, in our parents lifetime, and it's only getting worse. So how about not getting derailed with bullshit, and let's focus on the real issue, not some horseshit you just make up?
Dec 4, 23 8:09 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
I disagree completely with the idea of “ancestral lands” or “indigenous” peoples. There is no such thing. The Jews should have been relocated to the US and other allied states post war. Yes, the initial act of creating Israel in Palestine was a mistake rooted in a bad narrative - the same bad narrative that is now being used to argue for the removal of Israel by the other side.
Dec 4, 23 9:34 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
No one is arguing - at least convincingly - arguing for "removal" of Israel. What is being argued is for the removal of the apartheid conditions; what currently exists is incompatible with a democracy. See my other comments for more. A One State solution, where a pluralistic democracy is the law of the land. No. More. Ethnonationalist. States.
Blood and soil nationalism, no matter where it exists, is anathema to a free people.
Dec 5, 23 10:19 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
I agree with that in theory. In practice it’s difficult because of the widespread antisemitism in the region. That’s the point I’m trying to make. The opportunity for that is decades gone. The only way that a one state solution could happen without it devolving into civil war would be for authority to lie in the hands of an outside coalition govt. that’s what I was getting at earlier. First and foremost Hamas needs to be eradicated and Irans proxies need to be shown that interference will not work in their favor.
Dec 5, 23 10:40 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
While I’m generally against nation building, this particular situation may require it.
Dec 5, 23 10:47 am ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
What is our track record of nation building, at the end of gun, record look like?
Not mine, but if you want to talk about slavery, that’s also not a unique feature of the west.
Dec 2, 23 4:04 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Your post is so foolish. You are trying to impose guilt upon a person living in the 21st century for things that happened before they were born by people who may be from the same continent as their ancestors - whom most likely were poor farmers. But this only applies to Europe. God forbid we apply a consistent logic to the many other empires across history.
Dec 2, 23 4:12 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
You're blathering on like no one knows that, and that knowing that somehow matters. The current hegemonic domination lies in western countries, has been that for over two centuries. It is, coming to an end.
Dec 2, 23 4:36 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Israel is a tiny dot in the Arab world. The hegemonic domination of that part of the world lies with the Arab states whom gained domination through imperialism and are now largely theocratic and homogeneous (through ethnic cleansing
of their own).
Dec 2, 23 5:25 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
The West created modern Israel. The West supports modern Israel. Christian Evangelicals believe in the second coming, where, in Israel. Stop thinking that there's some kind of pure agency at play; Israel is a theocratic ethnostate.
You seem to value history, with none of the lessons, others here are not interested in litigating the past - centuries past - not because we don't find it valuable to learn from it, but because we know the only thing that can change, is the now.
Dec 2, 23 5:35 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
I bring up history only because of the ahistorical assertions being made.
20% of Israel’s population is Muslim. There are only 20 million Jews in the world.
Dec 2, 23 6:07 pm ·
·
Richard Balkins's comment has been hidden
View comment
None of it matters b3tadine. The second coming isn't this world. Israel is anywhere GOD decides. Read Revelations again. The Israel today is not GOD's Israel that is referenced in the second coming. When the second coming happens, it will be by GOD's will not by our hands or our actions. We recreating Israel isn't going to be triggering the second coming. Even then, GOD can decide to rescind that and say, you know, f--- the humans. Who are we to tell God or demand anything of God. God can decide to just like the infamous Q in Star Trek TNG, snap His fingers and we all just no longer exist. Just like that. That is what ALMIGHTY POWER means and can do. What have Christians done other than being among the most genocidal, bloody handed asses the world has ever seen? History of Christianity is well... ugly. Why should he come? Why save a bunch of worthless trash that would attempt to kill him? Humans aren't exactly worthy or thankful of being saved from death by a hypothetical resurrection that has not seen one legitimate scientific proof of resurrection documented, ever. So people kind of look at this as kind of a placibo against the anxieties of life and death but no one really believes that there will be this resurrection and God is more like Santa Claus. A nice story for our kids and child within us. God as religious institutions and religious texts says is a work of fiction. While there may be a divine being, is it likely that being has ever interacted with us if we are really just microbials in that being's body that embodies this universe and whatever beyond. I can think of the true God of creation as a body like a tree so large this universe we live in is just a single cell. We live inside just one cell. The multiple universe in time-space-matter-quantum reality is the composition of cells that makes the GOD's being. We see GOD every day but only a fraction of GOD's body. So do we really believe GOD is having such a personal relationship with humans? Do you have that with the microbial life inside your body and have personal conversations with it? Do you, really? Most of the U.S. thinks Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious beliefs are really mythologies. All fiction that some believe in still but just doesn't actually exist. Kind of like children's belief in Santa Claus. Eventually, they realize there's no Santa Claus. There was a person in history names Saint Nick that was an inspiration for the story that some believe as real until they grow up. Is the God character in the Bible, real? This is why there is a decline in believers. The new 21st century religion is atheism/agnostisim or something of the sort that is not attached to any organized institution of religion. Science doesn't deny that there isn't a "God Being" of some kind. Because, it could be that "God" is the encompassing universe(s). However, the Bible is just a book with a fantastic story and some good moral teachings by individuals. It is possible there was a Jesus figure. There is some historical data to allude to such but of course such records hve deterioriated over time and records of the day were limited in the first place. He may have been a very forward thinking, ahead of his time rabbi. Killed... not too unlike MLK, jr. People who tend to rock the cultural boat tends to get killed by people who fear changing the established way. This doesn't mean these people were GOD. Christians basis their belief on pure faith alone without proof. How can there be? Now, as I questioned God's existence or GOD's relationship with humanity, maybe such a GOD can talk to us but through our mind. Psionically. Maybe. Maybe the one way to communicate to us in a form that can. A voice of a being so massive could be deafening beyond belief. However, psionic communication maybe more effective and gets through the translation and presenting itself in a form comprehensible to humans. An 'avatar' such as the burning bush or communicated as a voice in the mind. Hence, conveying psionic connection. I think that is perhaps the means and method that GOD would use to communicate with us little lifeforms living within him. So my question then may be, what second coming? God never left. We just don't recognize him as God. God is the day and night sky. God is the rock you walk on. God is stars, the planets, etc. It is part of God's living body. You think it is just inanimate and just that. God is connected to every proton, neutron, electron of this universe and every universe. So maybe, that is God. You are part of God but not God itself. You are your own being but God is symbiotically linked to all. So what "second" coming? That is premised on the idea that God left. The second coming isn't a physically second coming. The second coming is about becoming realigned with God and back in relationship with God. Israel is the metaphor of being back in relation with God not about a real place on this earth. A new Eden. Revelations was a metaphor. The 1000 years is symbolic of wholeness as "great battle between good and evil" and "armageddon" is about the great struggle of our life as both saint and sinner. When we die, our soul... our essence joins in union with God and we become closer with God than we are in our disjointed existence. Our material essence that separates us keeps us turning in ourselves as separated. When we die, our consciousness and soul (Vulcan's called katra) joins with God at the core and not as disjoined souls. We begin to exist in God's inner mind in his 'consciousness' and mind. A symbiotic mind/soul meld and transference. It has nothing to do with this rock, here. The writer(s) of Revelations, has to use metaphor, imagery, and recognized places to convey an idea at level they could understand without any frame of reference of science we might have today or even scientific theories and ideas we have conceived in sci-fi that they had zero reference to back then. Pay attention that the second coming is when you die and join into the "kingdom of God". Your armageddon is the final turmoil of life itself. The turmoil everyone faces with death. The emotional struggles of end life before entering new life. That is what it is.
Frank, why do you resort to only posting half truths? The pretense of your comment suggests that you think the stat is meaningful in any way. Have you even looked into what it means to be an Arab in Israel?
Dec 3, 23 9:00 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
I don’t have anything to compare to. There are 3 Jews in Egypt, 0 in Jordan, 4 in Syria, 20 in Lebanon, 20 in Libya, 0 in Sudan, 4 in Iraq. At one time there were substantial Jewish populations in these areas. They were all displaced or killed.
Dec 3, 23 1:03 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
antisemitism is a real threat to this tiny ethnic minority in this part of the world. We can’t have the conversation without acknowledging that.
Dec 3, 23 1:05 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Lol. The typical Zionist ploy - bring antisemitism into the mix to kill the conversation. Shame on you, using genocide to validate genocide.
There was a large pro Israel demonstration planned near my office today but then the bus service hired to bring in the protestors cancelled because we got 10cm of snow and ice. Instead of blaming the weather, they are claiming antisemitism instead. (all school buses were cancelled as a prevention by 6am). People are just fucking dumb.
I did read it, did you not understand my point? Your facts are meaningless, without context, and wholly misses the point. So what if there are roughly 20% Arab citizens, they don't have the same rights as Jewish citizens.
Dec 4, 23 8:14 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
I’m not defending Israel. I’m saying that compared to their neighbors they have a far more tolerant state, and by the numbers of Jews in those surrounding states Israel has a good reason for fortifying its state. We are talking about now. No time machines. Yes I know that Iran was once Paris of the ME and those states were once more tolerant. The region has since been taken over by Islamic theocracy. Did US and Israel play a role in this, wouldn’t doubt it. But NOW is what we have to deal with. Not 1948. Is Israel removed its fortifications tomorrow and the US abandoned them a second holocaust would soon follow. This is the anxiety that they live with. No excuse whatsoever for what they are doing to civilians, but it’s not a one sided issue. Sometimes there are two bad guys and you just have to denounce both
Dec 4, 23 8:45 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Wrong, there are several accounts wherein the Palestinians and Israelis used to live in peaceful coexistence, their kids playing with each other and so forth. It is Israel's actions that have made them the most hated country in that region and now the world. If Hamas is a terrorist organization, Israel should be branded a terrorist state.
I acknowledged that. We don’t have the benefit of a Time Machine. Things have changed for a number of reasons. Now we have Israel surrounded by antisemitic Islamic theocracies. Whether that’s a result of their own actions or not, the Israeli civilians are faced with that threat, and there is only 1 thing keeping that dam from breaking - the very powerful US military. Israel’s military is powerful compared to Palestine, but the other state’s surrounding Israel could wipe them out in a short time. We have a very difficult multi dimensional situation. Unfortunately the innocent people of both sides are the pawns in this. This is not Avatar where bad white colonizers take over peace loving tree huggers. That’s the mythology that many folks seem to
imagine.
Dec 5, 23 11:49 am ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
The Abraham Accords, the treaty with Egypt, relations with Jordan. You're working really hard to prove something with little evidence, all the while standing on the edge of a fundamental misreading; the only thing that has changed is apocalyptic evangelical Zionist agenda...it's grown horribly dangerous, and they've found their avatar in Bibi.
Israeli gov. led by a war criminal prime minister, wanted to start the 100+ years of miserable Palestinian history from Oct. 6, balancing the books and assuming the position of the victim. But, it blew up in its face. There is much more empathy and support for the Palestinians. Worldwide public opinion now strongly demands a two-state solution or the end of Apartheid.
I still find it concerning that some people aren't willing at admit that their 'side' has been doing horrible things to non combatants. The amount of mental gymnastics for people to justify their 'side' being 'the good guys' in this cacophony of murder disturbs me. The comments made on this subject makes me question the respect I had for users here and my association with this online community.
Ok, said it before, will say it again - Hamas is bad as well and they are a totalitarian group. That said Israel has proved itself to be much worse and way more brutal, UNDER THE GUISE of a modern, democratic government. To be fair, I would like to not live under either of them.
You missed the times when I said both sides need to be stopped. That's the really sad part. Users like yourself don't seem to care about stopping the violence on both sides. You only seem to care that your 'side' is viewed as being justified for the killing of civilians.
Dec 4, 23 12:55 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Again, reductive thinking. The war needs to stopped on both sides for now and all generations to come. I hope that happens and Israel stops the brutal occupation in favor of coexistence. Happy?
It's a start. I still question the reputation of several users here though.
The comments made on this topic and the unrelated actions of several users here are still making me question my involvement in this community.
Dec 4, 23 1:26 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
“To be fair, I would like to not live under either of them.“. What state in the region would a homosexual person do best in? So
You seem to put
Israel’s state and Israel as a western culture into two compartments? Is that. Correct to say? If so, I agree. The state of israel is a terribly oppressive state. I’ve criticized them consistently. However, there is no comparison between how oppressive western culture is to the predominantly Islamic culture of the region.
No, it’s not a straw man. It’s the central reason why some strange coalitions have formed, and why so many folks are doing mental gymnastics to justify Hamas. It’s all part of the same bad narrative. A shared desire to see the collapse of the west. A false idea that the west is the prominent force of oppression in the world rather than the prominent force of progress, freedom, and democracy. You have eluded to that a few times on here yourself. The “woke” hate of the west has gone so far that some people are willing to give a pass for terrorism, systematic rape, and child murder. Israel can be criticized while acknowledging all of these other realities that I’ve pointed out.
Dec 4, 23 8:09 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
It is. Your assumptions have zero relevance without lived experience. I will continue to state what I've said in the past; violence against civilians is not acceptable. Given that conscription is mandatory in Israel, it will be hard to gage who is soldier and who isn't. Israel is responsible for a good number of civilian deaths, his many, we won't know as they are destroying evidence.
Dec 4, 23 8:16 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
A fucking Genocidal former cabinet member just croaked, he was responsible for assassination squads, coups, Genocide for a majority of the last quarter of the 20th century, and we're supposed to believe America is a force for good in the world? I can't even say that without laughing.
“Your assumptions have zero relevance without lived experience“. Lived experience is a problematic concept. We should all be able to put ourselves in other peoples shoes. It’s not too hard.
Dec 4, 23 9:57 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
It's not uncommon for people to believe that Islam (or most any religion) is incompatible with queer existence. The ones who do injustice to the queer community are religious leaders, not the religion itself.
To suggest that the West is somehow the proper arbiter of justice and progress is to stand up for centuries of genocide, colonialism, ethnic cleansing, race-based exploitation, and more.
"We should all be able to put ourselves in other peoples shoes".
I will not entertain the idea of empathizing with those committing genocide, statecraft or colonialism.
Personally I'll even go as far as to support Hamas, exactly as I would have supported any other historical resistance group before my time. I do not condemn violence against occupation; or would you have me condemn the Lakota Sioux for their revolt against American settlers in the 1870s? How about the violent rebellion of Haitian slaves in the 1790s? Violence is only called terrorism when it's done by the oppressed.
this is the reason i've avoided weighing in on this.. elements of the left have gone zealous for the oppression narrative, like jovan above. in this situation you're not the oppressed, you're the oppressor. it's very different for a palestinian under actual duress to support hamas than someone safely behind their computer screen in the u.s. whose tax dollars are supporting the very thing they're "virtuously" standing against. yes, we should be overwhelmingly distraught at what is happening to palestinians at the hands of a completely corrupt israeli state. but advocating for violence over peace for some sense of justice which you think you can even begin to understand thousands of miles away is a bridge too far for me.
i'm not saying violence is never justified - i'm pointing out the contorted position of "supporting hamas" as a u.s. citizen, the irony isn't lost on me. i think advocating for violence in a place most of us here know very little about (and can't ever really, materially know much about) isn't the wisest position.
i also wonder how many of you are willing to do the thing you're advocating for? it's much easier to rattle sabres from behind a computer screen than to actually have stake in the position.
I've been trying to digest Black Jacobins, it's very hard, very hard to hear about the Haitian Revolution. I've been reading Black Skin, White Masks, also difficult to process.
"i'm not saying violence is never justified - i'm pointing out the contorted position of "supporting hamas" as a u.s. citizen, the irony isn't lost on me. i think advocating for violence in a place most of us here know very little about (and can't ever really, materially know much about) isn't the wisest position.
i also wonder how many of you are willing to do the thing you're advocating for? it's much easier to rattle sabres from behind a computer screen than to actually have stake in the position "
I agree.
This is why I've lost respect for several users on
this thread and question my association with this forums 'community' in general.
Square: Yes, you're ultimately right that because I live in the USA as a non-Palestinian, my vocal support or lack thereof doesn't materially mean anything. But if you want to go that route, neither does tone-policing.
Could you elaborate on how it's a "contorted position" to be in favor of resistance to Israel? Just because I don't condemn violence, doesn't mean that I actively want people to be killed or whatever. I'm only saying that, as a non-participant in this struggle, I can't deny the right of the oppressed to fight their oppressor, even if by violent means.
EDIT TO ADD: I think it's silly to suggest that random Americans (or westerners in general) are the oppressor. The US government certainly is, but I am not my government. I'm not actively or personally helping to colonize and ethnically cleanse Palestine.
sameolddoctor, what do you think isreal’s response to oct 7 should have been? We both agree that bombing all of Gaza and killing civilians is bad.
Dec 5, 23 11:40 am ·
·
square.
i'm not "tone-policing" whatever that means. i'm calling out inconsistencies. here's one: supporting hamas is not equivalent to supporting resistance to israel. further, resistance isn't always violent. and, your denying or not denying the "right of the oppressed" means very little.. what authority are you speaking from to be able to do so? this is too abstract for me: how does one go about actually denying or permitting the rights of others when they aren't directly involved in the conflict?
to add point: i have no doubt hamas and other affiliated groups do not adopt the nuance you are attempting here. there are far to many examples in history to point to.
“I love Frank's overly liberal, fakely woke retorts - "Oh what about the gays"? As if Israel is the patron savant of LGBTQIA+ causes”. I care very much about liberal values and democracy. When a western liberal democracy, or an ally of western liberal democracies fails to practice what they preach I criticize that particular state for not upholding such values. I don’t do a 180 and chant and wave the flag of Islamic theocracies as we are seeing all
over colleges.
To be fair Frank you'd better not wave the flag of the US then . . .
In fact - you'd better go off grid and stop paying your taxes if you really want to do something about it other than just talk. The same goes for the rest of you.
I guess there's no point in saying "wow genocide is bad" unless you're willing to quit your job, fly thousands of miles and go fight Israel with a gun in hand... same energy as "Oh you critique capitalism, yet you own a computer".
"it's very different for a palestinian under actual duress to support hamas than someone safely behind their computer screen in the u.s. whose tax dollars are supporting the very thing they're "virtuously" standing against."
The U.S. is a Republic not a direct democracy. Our day to day use of our tax dollars are not ours to control or decide. It is decided by the people we elect and the people hired and employed. We only get to decide who we elect and their policies. We don't know what their policy will be regarding every situation. Especially, considering the presidential debates recently hasn't been all that informative. It's more like an entertainment show than one about actual informative purpose. Media doesn't care. The U.S. policy isn't even the president's policy. It is the policies of everyone elected and their agendas and what gets agreed upon and what doesn't. The President's agenda applies to the executive branch.
Until it is time for reelection, most elected officials don't base their decision on us. They make whatever decision they want and only considering their re-election when it is getting close to that time for them so they want to secure reelection but after elected and before the mid-point to re-election, they don't care about us.
Politicians don't generally care about us. Every one of us has an opinion. So, why bother. They make decisions on their own or by some colluded party politics things. How my tax dollars are spent is not for me to control.
I can only control what country my citizenship is with. Well, there's processes and it isn't instant but I can choose to be a U.S. citizen or seek citizenship in another country.
The same reality applies every country I could choose to go to.... I don't get to decide how the tax dollars collected are spent on the day to day level. I might be allowed to vote and vote the elected official but my decision is the most broad and macroscopic. I can get to effect broad policies by who I vote for.
WTF Chad, one is not allowed to make honest mistakes? Like you calling Palestinians as PAKISTANI a few days ago? If you dont want to participate in this thread, please do not, its not like you are offering any pearls of wisdom either.
No one is SOD. Nothing you say is going to mean or make any difference. We can yap all we wont, scream, moan, groan, fart, or whatever, it won't do anything. Unless you work in the White House in a ledership role or elected or assistant to an elected official, all your noise here means absolute 0. Why? They aren't reading your post. We are not the audience to have any role to do a damn thing. My next opportunity to do anything is the November 2024 election. That's it. Until then, we're just talking to ourselves. If you want to do something, take action with directing your energy and time to the right target audience.
"WTF Chad, one is not allowed to make honest mistakes? Like you calling Palestinians as PAKISTANI a few days ago? If you dont want to participate in this thread, please do not, its not like you are offering any pearls of wisdom either."
You didn't make any type of mistake.
You admitted you have no knowledge or experience with military tactics, then stated that you had suggestions on how to perform military tactics.
That's just being arrogant and by definition, inept.
"I guess there's no point in saying "wow genocide is bad" unless you're willing to quit your job, fly thousands of miles and go fight Israel with a gun in hand... same energy as "Oh you critique capitalism, yet you own a computer". "
Not at all.
The issue is you're telling people how to think about something because of your great experience and a current understanding in the matter. You've admitted that you don't have ether these things when it comes to this subject though.
I could respect your opinion on the subject if it wasn't for your unwavering arrogance that 'you know better' than anyone else.
Dec 5, 23 6:40 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
Chad, I guess its just easier to be on the fence all the time. Using your real name to be on the fence is no mark of bravery or intellect. Its just ... nothing, even worse than hiding behind a screen name and standing up for something.
Lmao Chad, read through my comments: I never said anyone has to think the way I do. I'm giving my opinions in an open forum. I don't know where you got the idea that I don't have a current understanding of the events?? But yeah, I will look down my nose at people who continue to fence-sit and meekly justify genocide while trying to somehow claim a moral high ground for doing so.
Dec 5, 23 8:05 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
Like if your goal is to do the "well none of us live there so picking sides doesn't help anyone", then like why are you commenting on this thread? Fence-sitting doesn't contribute to any sort of discourse.
Literally (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Rick has more interesting contributions to this thread than you do.
sod, I do have to say this. You are not a military professional with professional experience in making military strategic plans. You are an architect, I think. I could be wrong. Not checking to verify because I don't have the desire to do it. However, most of us can only contribute to this dialogue by being keyboard warriors because if you aren't literally gotten off your ass and drive to District of Columbia and have an in-person conversation with the President of the United States (or go to your equivalent capital and leaders in your country if not in U.S.) then all you do by yapping about it is annoy your fellow forum users who equally are unable to do more than being keyboard warriors on a web forum that absolutely no one in the decision-making leaders regarding these matters in connection with any country is even using at all let alone reading your posts. So we're all barking up our own asses than doing anything for anyone in Israel or Palestine.
jovan, you're shifting my words. i'm calling out the fact that you said "i support hamas."
beta, who's we? certainly wasn't you. are you ready to pick up arms today? i'm not. love all the armchair revolutionaries here, reading books doesn't make you one.
Dec 6, 23 9:14 am ·
·
square.
eod my biggest problem is the calls and justification of violence by people who have never been in similar salutations and who i doubt would be willing to do so knowing where we all come from - it's just projecting because there's no tangible way to back up what you're saying. like i said above, i can understand someone living in gaza supporting hamas. but the rest of us should be calling for a ceasefire and supporting peace first and foremost, things we can actually do here through political action.
"Chad, I guess its just easier to be on the fence all the time. Using your real name to be on the fence is no mark of bravery or intellect. Its just ... nothing, even worse than hiding behind a screen name and standing up for something."
I'm not on the fence about anything in this conflict.
I think both sides are attempting genocide.
Each side is commixing war crimes by actively targeting civilians.
Each side must be stopped.
While I can't support either side, right now Israel is being worse of two evils.
"Lmao Chad, read through my comments: I never said anyone has to think the way I do. I'm giving my opinions in an open forum. I don't know where you got the idea that I don't have a current understanding of the events?? But yeah, I will look down my nose at people who continue to fence-sit and meekly justify genocide while trying to somehow claim a moral high ground for doing so.
Like if your goal is to do the "well none of us live there so picking sides doesn't help anyone", then like why are you commenting on this thread? Fence-sitting doesn't contribute to any sort of discourse.
Literally (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Rick has more interesting contributions to this thread than you do. "
I'm not on the fence about anything in this conflict.
I think both sides are attempting genocide.
Each side is commixing war crimes by actively targeting civilians.
Each side must be stopped.
While I can't support either side, right now Israel is being worse of two evils.
You simply want your side to win the conflict and thus ignore / justify what they're doing.
You talk about having a discourse and making contributions however you've been very clear that if someone doesn't agree with you on this topic they they are a bad person and shouldn't be listened to. Your hierocracy is astounding. I've lost all respect for you as person because of this.
Dec 6, 23 1:10 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
Chad: "You simply want your side to win the conflict and thus ignore / justify what they're doing."
Yes I absolutely would love to see Palestinian people be able to peacefully return to the land that has been taken from them to form a colonial ethno-state.
"if someone doesn't agree with you on this topic they they are a bad person and shouldn't be listened to."
I never said you shouldn't have your opinion Chad. But I do think the "both sides are attempting genocide" is a bit obscene, considering one side has actively erased entire neighborhoods of people, and the other side has killed a few hundred people (yes, I am openly saying that Palestinian liberation groups have indeed killed Israeli people).
Over the last 50 years, not the last 15. Oddly enough in the beginning the disparity of the death of civilians per country wasn't as lopsided. Don't misunderstand me, Palestine have always lost more civilians than Israel. It just hasn't been to such an extreme as currently.
That doesn't make one side more 'right' than the other though. It just means that the combat , and the current militaries need to be stopped ASAP.
"There is no life without dialogue. And in most parts of the world, dialogue is today being replaced by controversy, the language of efficiency. [...] ] But what is the mechanism of the controversy? It consists of regarding the enemy as an enemy, simplifying him therefore, and refusing to see him. The one I insult, I no longer know the color of his look. Thanks to controversy, we no longer live in a world of men, but a world of silhouettes. " - - - Albert Camus, The Witness to Liberty (1948, in Conferences and Speeches)
I can't remember if it was 1971 or 1972. I had walked to the side gate where I was stationed where my girlfriend was picking me up.
There was a line of cars off to the side and a guy was walking up to each car with a clipboard. As I got into the car my girlfriend said that guy with the clipboard was collecting signatures in support of Lt. Calley for the My Lai Massacre.
She said she had signed and we could wait for me to sign. I told her no. She asked why and I said because he had murdered those people.
I am sure some of the people on this thread will think I was disloyal and/or a bad soldier. You know who you are.
Those Vietnamese civilians were not murdered by American soldiers. They were murdered by individuals who ceased being American soldiers when they murdered those civilians.
George Floyd was not murdered by a policeman. He was murdered by someone who ceased to be a policeman when he murdered him.
Rules of Engagement and the Constitution are not legal technicalities. They are what separates soldiers and policemen from murdering thugs.
What do we have here. Well we have some murdering thugs who massacred innocent civilians and some soldiers who turned into murdering thugs in short order.
If you can't see that then you have a problem with recognising objective reality. You know who you are.
Arch2, that's irrelevant here. Here, we're irrelevent because for or against, your voice or opinion means absolutely zero. Why? We are not in any position to do a damn thing. The profession of architecture has zero role. Unless there is a petition taken to Congress or the President of the U.S. or equivalent to any other country, it means absolutely nothing. All you do is make noise. You can't making change. You aren't supporting or fighting the war in Israel/Palestine. There isn't anyone there talking about our wonderful genocide central debate on this forum. No one there even read a single post. That's why we are just barking up our own asses.
First, I am not voting for the orange turdkey. Who here plans to vote for that treasonous turd? Most of us, probably not. I agree with you that it can help form a narrative for the upcoming election. Given Trump's nature, such a thing wouldn't even be given air time. Trump would waste time whining about his trials and the witch hunt against him by Biden, which he's too undisciplined to bring legitimate arguments to support his claims. His devoted cult followers will walk off a cliff for him because they are dumber than dodo birds. Don't waste your time on morons like that. Talk to people who are willing to change their mind. Granted I won't change my mind about Donald Dump but my opinion of others are more mutable with some level of critical thinking. I lean towards Biden because he currently has the strongest chance of defeating Donald Dung. With other candidates, it might not be. With a your candidate, the Democrats may need to go with Kamila Harris with Biden as VP. As a strategy shift with regards to personalities. It is hard to say. However, this discussion is about Israel v. Palestine. How does our discussion here going to effect that other than its small and microscopic effect on the 2024 election, itself.
As for Project 2025, they discredited themselves by backing Donald 'the John' Turdbucket. If they are really behind Trump and Trumpism/MAGA platform then they can all literally be lined up and executed for TREASON and then go to a special place in he'll and be burned for eternity suffering eternal pain a trillion times more than any human ever experienced. That is how low these people stand in my book. Of course I support law and order and justice for all... how it should be. Ideally, more swiftly than it has been.
Arch2, that is the most liberal milquetoast take I've seen in a while. A cop doesn't conveniently stop being a cop because they murdered someone. Cops and soldiers stay in their positions all the time after they slaughter black and brown people by the dozen. Saying that they "ceased to be [x] when they did [y]" is a very convenient way to deny the systemic violence wielded by the United States against (historically) non-white people.
Dec 6, 23 5:41 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Also is that lesser evilism I see with the whole orange fascist thing?? Are you suggesting that if we just vote for the blue fascist, we'll all be saved?? Because I guarantee they won't help us either.
Here's some facts for you:
Dec 6, 23 5:44 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Dammit, apparently my longer rant disappeared when I edited (same thing as sameolddoctor above?). If I care enough later to debate about why Democrats are just as bad for BIPOC and other minorities, I'll repost later.
Really?.................................................................... sure about that. Nothing is as bad as the orange turd and the wannabes of that turd, when it comes to U.S. politics.
With regards to post disappearing. Was the long post during edit? If so, don't do it as an edit under a reply or any edit. There is a time limit to submit edits. Best to use the big text box below then click on post comments.
If you are using a smartphone, keep posts short. Most posts I write that are lengthy, I'm using a PC because I have an actual keyboard to use. Phones are a pita.
JM I am not going to try and parse the convuluted logic of your assumptions and conclusions.
I am just going to ask a simple question.
Why were civilians targeted instead of the military? I mean that would be the obvious choice.
Dec 6, 23 7:54 am ·
·
____
I am aware of how qualified immunity and profiling create the predicate for systematic racism.
I am also aware of the history of war crimes of this country.
I probably know more about it and have been angry about it a lot longer than you.
Dec 6, 23 8:29 am ·
·
ivanmillya
A few things about the "targeting civilians" thing.
First is that IDF personnel reports have all but confirmed that many of the Israeli deaths on October 7th were caused directly by IDF shooting. So that muddies the waters as to how many Israelis were actually killed by Hamas.
Second: Hamas rockets aren't supported by an infrastructure that gives them the precision to know where exactly their attacks will land beyond general location and rudimentary aiming (vs the military craft and state infrastructure at Israel's disposal, which allows very precise destruction of Gaza hospitals and apartment buildings).
Third: The narrative of "Israel civilians being targeted by Hamas" is kinda sneaky, considering that 1) Israel has compulsory military service, meaning that a majority of the civilians being "targeted" are actually either active or reserve duty military personnel; and 2) Israel citizens are directly complicit in the mass removal of Palestinians from their literal and tangible homes (plenty of video evidence of Israeli citizens forcibly stealing actual houses from their current Palestinian owners).
Finally, I'd ask you the same: Why is Israel indiscriminately bombing hospitals and leveling whole neighborhoods in Gaza, shooting at and firing rockets at Gazan Palestinians on designated evacuation routes after specifically telling them to use those roads?
The problem you are having is that you don't have a coherent metric with which make an analysis.
Even under mandatory conscription children are excluded.
During that attack those thugs made individual choices to rape and kill.
Put it this way.
If you want to take over a prison and they are in an open air prison. Why would you murder the warden's secretary and her baby instead of the warden and the head guard?
These thugs made these choices up close and personal. They didn't target on duty IDF personnel which would have been the objective of a true military operation.
On the other side.
Someone murdering another person does not justify murdering the murders family, friends, and neighbors.
This disproportionate response is a war crime.
How can the USA figure out how to stop this insane horror? On one side we have no good will with the Muslim world. On the other side how can we reason with Israel when we did exactly the same thing for exactly the same reason in Iraq. Which resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths.
You and others may not want to believe this but if anyone can figure this out it is Biden.
Anyone who’s lived in a violent environment or has experienced violence first hand wouldn’t be so casual to support it. Jovan sounds like a very coddled and deeply indoctrinated young kid. He has the right to his opinions, but I really hope that he is not around children
with the things that he’s saying.
Dec 6, 23 10:59 am ·
·
Frankroidlite
By the way, There is nothing more racist and ethnocentric than holding ones own culture to a higher moral standard than another.
Dec 6, 23 11:02 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Arch2: The whole of October 7th is quite muddy, considering the primary reporting on the attack overwhelmingly comes from either IDF sources (who are obviously biased in this situation) or from independent Palestinian & other Arab journalists (many of whom are killed by IDF).
I find it hard to believe sources which come straight from Israel talking about the "horrific barbarism" of Hamas, considering the situation that is, and has been, going for 75 years.
But yes obviously Joe Biden can tackle this issue: the man who is providing $14 billion in military aid to a country that has killed over 20,000 Palestinians (including over 5,000 children). Yes, he and the United States will certainly solve this multi-faceted geopolitical issue of colonialism and ethnic cleansing.
Jovan, yes. This is because Israel is a country. Hamas is sort of a terrorist cell. The missiles are likely older model but still fairly precise guided missiles we gave Israel some time ago. Israel may have eventually acquired or reverse engineered those missiles and made new ones or just acquire more from the same company we contracted to make ours. When they are allies, arms manufacturers can just take the orders and ship them to them as customers. No particular embargo issue.
Israel War practice is based on the Torah and King David as precedence. An enemy is not truly defeated until they literally no longer exist. It isn't technically genocide exactly but an extermination policy that isn't any better. Genocide is killing a race based on race. They are basically the same race. They just different cultures. This is more, simply a kill them all policy.
It shouldn't be intellectually difficult to hold a balanced position, I mean, if you claim to be for liberalism and human rights. You can condemn Israeli occupation and war tactics AND condemn Hamas.
Some people on this thread don't seem to understand what human rights mean. Or maybe they do, but their beliefs in false models of "colonialism" and the "noble victim" have become too connected to their personal identity to abandon. The position I'm referring to here - that if you belong to a nation that is judged to be guilty of certain crimes then all the citizens of that nation immediately lose their human rights, and tying children to their parents and burning them alive is somehow justified as an act of "resistance" rather than what it actually is - complete barbarism.
People are marinating in this shit and the moral rot is literally jaw dropping.
I was referring to the “woke” ideology that has led many naive young people to excuse the Hamas rapists and butchers. Bad ideologies led to bad conclusions about specific situations. Most Americans saw this coming. They saw it when rioters were excused for looting shops and assaulting citizens a few summers ago. Causal acceptance of violence in the name of this very incorrect and incomplete narrative.
Frank - not really. Most ideologies in the world today don't accept change. This is bad when your ideology shapes your entire understanding or misconception of the social and political world.
Dec 7, 23 11:06 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
Frank, don't think you understand what an ideology is.
Dec 7, 23 11:30 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Frank, liberalism feeds fascism. Liberalism is the socio-economic result of the Western enlightenment, and its tenets directly contribute to the sentiments of nationalism and authoritarianism. To NS's point (or maybe just jumping off it), liberalism as an ideology has been the driving force, if not the progenitor, of colonialism, race-based power dynamics and exploitation, destruction of the environment, and the modern capitalist hellscape we live in today. It ran its course in deposing fuedalism as a governing system in most of society, but its merits have long been overshadowed by its destruction of nearly every kind of life on earth.
jovan it's clear you mean well, but this itself is an ideological take, and one that has gained popularity in the past decade or so especially in certain circles reading certain literature... while there are important and valid points to the critique, it's not a deep reading of liberalism at all, and is very much fashionable right now. but it does explain a lot about your positions above.
i hope there are indeed some things you enjoy in the world, and if you do liberalism probably has something to do with it. it's not all bad!
Dec 7, 23 11:55 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Seems like you're assuming that I only read about this yesterday, and that my views are entirely beholden to "what's popular in certain circles", which is kinda insulting. My goal in writing my thoughts above were not to give some thorough analytical critique of liberalism as a social ideology.
Yes, I recognize that the modern world provides me with lots of different things I like that are a result of liberal economics. But it feels like you're trying to use that as a point to dismiss the very real criticism that liberalism was born out of (and arguably directly serves) white nationalism.
Dec 7, 23 1:20 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
I’ll bring this to a personal place as I’m currently facing the reality of this life. It’s short. If your position doesn’t make this short life better for individuals then it’s probably wrong, because we experience life as individuals primarily. All the “this group is the oppressed and that group the oppressor” stuff is simply too abstract and broad to matter where it matters. Stop ALL violence in this world unless it’s necessary to preserve innocent lives. It’s only justified when it’s in self defense or the defense of others from some imminent threat. I believe that Hamas is an imminent threat which is why their removal is necessary for both the Israel and Gaza. But indiscriminate bombing is obviously a wrong way to do it. Any other form of violence is in my opinion unjustified.
Dec 7, 23 7:47 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Overall, I try to decide which solution renders the best results for the most people. There is rarely a perfect solution. Don’t sacrifice the good for the perfect. Generally liberalism has improved life for more people than anything else I’m aware of. We
Dec 7, 23 8:14 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
We (the west) have been far
Dec 7, 23 8:14 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
from perfect, but we have created a fairly decent balance of freedom, safety,
Dec 7, 23 8:15 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
You can’t critique a system like liberalism without having an alternative system in mind that renders better outcomes. Do you have a better system in mind to replace liberalism Jovan?
Dec 7, 23 8:34 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
I most certainly can critique a system which has been largely responsible for the last three centuries of genocide and class and race oppression and exploitation. I personally don't believe that systems of government are in any way a net positive for freedom, and so I won't offer a replacement system. I do think that there are several things that could easily be done away with which would inevitably make peoples' lives better: statecraft, nationalism, capitalism, imperialism, and the insidious and nebulous idea that progress forward is inherently a good thing. I think by attacking and critiquing these systems, the world becomes better for the earth and the life that exists on it.
“for the last three centuries“. God knows It was rainbows and unicorns before that. You are making a common logical error. You assume that removing an imperfect system will default to a more perfect system. The opposite is almost guaranteed. You assume that the current system was imposed - but rather it evolved to be this way. This IS the improved updated version of civilization. Getting rid of windows 10 is not going to get you a quantum computer, it’s going to get you previous inferior versions of windows with even more bugs.
Dec 8, 23 11:16 am ·
·
square.
persons are certainly free to critique, but it rings hollow without an alternative vision in mind, or at least some tangible steps towards improving the current system. "doing away with statecraft" doesn't satisfy.
among the left (which i count myself), i find the most hyperbolic critiques and stances come from those who feel alienated from affecting change in their immediate lives, and they often resort to wildly acerbic critiques and unrealistic alternatives as a result of frustration (the result of a failure of our current politics and economics no doubt). maybe this applies above, maybe not. just an observation in my own experience.
Dec 8, 23 12:09 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
You consider it hyperbolic to say that doing away with statecraft, nationalism and imperialism would be a net positive for the world? Out of curiosity, which "left" do you speak for, so I can make sure to avoid it?
I think suggesting the things I would love to see be removed from society is absolutely an alternative vision. But it seems that you're fishing for me to suggest installing another form of government in the area, which I just disagree with. Governing bodies are antithetical to what I see as freedom and equity.
yes, "getting rid of government" is indeed hyperbolic for the actual world we all live in.
Dec 8, 23 12:32 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
You don't know what statecraft is. Getting rid of statecraft =/= removing governments. Just admit you have no idea what you're talking about, but somehow want to toe the civility line of "uhh but both sides are bad, please make peace and be nice to each other". You sound like a hippie.
Dec 8, 23 12:41 pm ·
·
square.
"I personally don't believe that systems of government are in any way a net positive for freedom, and so I won't offer a replacement system." the hell does this mean then? seems to me you're the one toeing the line.
if you actually read what i said above, i didn't say anything close to "both sides are bad."
Dec 8, 23 12:45 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
It means that I don't think governing bodies represent freedom for the people they represent, and you're not going to get me to advocate for the installation of some governing body that will inevitably quell political struggles through state-enacted violence (AKA the default answer provided by governments).
If you don't know, statecraft is the weaponization of governing agencies to adjust a political climate for the benefit of that government, and often at the detriment of the people who were there to begin with (AKA exactly what the US is doing with its media coverage
, speeches, and military aid to Israel).
"if you actually read what i said above, i didn't say anything close to "both sides are bad."
I think that I must have gotten thrown off when further up the thread, you said that it's a reasonable opinion to denounce both sides in equal measure.
Dec 8, 23 12:55 pm ·
·
square.
"it's very different for a palestinian under actual duress to support hamas than someone safely behind their computer screen in the u.s. whose tax dollars are supporting the very thing they're "virtuously" standing against. yes, we should be overwhelmingly distraught at what is happening to palestinians at the hands of a completely corrupt israeli state. but advocating for violence over peace for some sense of justice which you think you can even begin to understand thousands of miles away is a bridge too far for me."
this is actually what i said. israeli's war-crimes are horrific and completely disproportional. too many innocent palestinians have been killed. i unequivocally support a ceasefire.
call me a hippie, but i don't think it's as unrealistic as many of the things you're saying. and you can ridicule it all you want, but ultimately i hope for peace in the region.
Dec 8, 23 1:00 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
I have a really hard time taking people seriously who offer criticism without alternatives or at least understanding the unintended consequences of removing certain things. If you think that we are living in the most terrible time in history you obviously don’t know very much about history. This is the best it’s ever been, unfortunately.
Dec 8, 23 4:28 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
Has there ever been a society that you view as suitable?
Dec 8, 23 4:29 pm ·
·
ivanmillya
I really don't have any interest in whether or not you take me seriously. I've said my peace. At this point it's derailing into talking points about "which justified ruler would be better for society", and I have no interest in that conversation.
Dec 8, 23 4:34 pm ·
·
Frankroidlite
What society past or present reflects the ideals that you are talking about? If it’s never existed, don’t you think that there may be a reason for that?
The worst part of this whole thread is the whaboutism in the face of a totally disproportionate military response by Israel. The stats that we see with people dead, injured or displaced is in no way proportionate, I hope we can agree on that.
Carry on with this, it will be interesting to see what happens in our lifetimes with the dissolution of this ideological narrative and emergence of the global south.
...and why are you not surprised tho? Given that the US is a big supporter of Israel and that far too many in the US have a first shoot 4 times, ask questions later (if you have time)... it's no wonder the over the top burn everything down response is viewed as adequate.
Yes that is the US modus operandi, but its startling that Canada and most of Western Europe is also heavily involved in whataboutism, cheering on Palestinian deaths.
Dec 7, 23 12:44 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
TBF, there is a significant portion of people standing in front of the Canadian parliament cheering for Israeli deaths. See, we're both fair and balanced.
Wondaful discussions, but nothing has changed or will change. The US just send it 200th (THAT IS TWO HUNDRED) plane chock full of weapons and armament to Israel today.
Yup, same here - voted for Hillary in the primaries (very bad decision) and then Biden in the General Elections (even worse decision but had no choice). Not voting for either again. But I think a lot of right wing hawks will vote democrat, as also the hardcore israel supporters. Good luck to all of them.
Well you are aware that not voting for Biden is a vote for the other one who has stated he will declare himself dictator on day one, will build detention camps, prosecute his political opponents, shut down any media that opposes him. That is just for starters. It will be the end democracy, the rule of law, and your life as you know it.
Trump would be the END of the United States. Biden is just politician as normal before Trump which means U.S. on a normal day. At least the way it was before Trump. Biden represents normalcy. Biden represents some sanity. Biden represents a United States that will continue to exist. Stop promoting Trump. Trump represents a new Hitler. He means there will be a BLOODY and DEADLY Revolution where over 100 MILLION WILL DIE! Try to at least apply a little Hippocratic oath to your thinking as long you use the word 'doctor' in your alias. Don't waste our time with nonsense that Trump will only be a dictator for a day. The only way that would happen is if a general puts his/her desert eagle or whatever gun he/she has to Trump's head and pulls the trigger. Once a person is a dictator, they will NEVER relinquish that power voluntarily. No human in past 10 MILLION years has EVER done that. There is reasons why Biden hasn't been pushing to get into the issue.... WE FUCKING DO NOT BELONG THERE. WE NEVER SHOULD HAVE EVER GOT OUR NOSES IN THE MIDDLE EAST FEUD THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
Israel being created by us was a mistake. Period. It was a mistake that has been rife with conflict and that is STILL the issue. The Palestineans will never believe in Israel as a legitimate state and is to be eradicated. Israel's opinion is still just as much about eradicating the Palestineans. They will kill each other until one or both are eradicated. Israel will kill the Palestineans off and the Islam nations around will eradicate Israel from existence. This was going to happen and we knew it before we created that country with the UK. It is only a miracle that it lasted this long but with how much costly intervention by us? So it is time to just let it go the way of the dodo and the U.S. focus on its own needs for a fucking change instead of negligence it has done for SEVEN DECADES straight. It is time to step back and look at what the other western world countries have been doing.
Why is Canada treating its people fairly well? By minding their own business and not getting involved in every damn petty b.s. somewhere in the world. Why are the Nordic countries doing fine? Because they take care of their own people FIRST and foremost. They don't need a military war budget the size of Godzilla when they can use 1/10th that and put the money for its own countries needs. We were doing things right before World War II. Yes, we can have intelligence apparatus across the world but it doesn't mean we need to have military placed all over the world. Now, we have orbital platforms that we can vaporize our enemies from orbit so what the hell are doing getting into war with massive troops deployment and when we can scale that back to more domestic use. This is why I think it is a shame that Israel and Palestineans can't possibly work things out but then they were bad neighbors by design. It was designed to fail. Unless you wish to spend a trillion dollars a year to keep these jackasses from killing each others, what's the damn point.
If they kill each other off, we would be rid of that trouble. Let them kill themselves off and be over instead of wasting our time. This isn't about race. It is about nation state issues. United States is not charted by the Constitution to police the world so why the fuck are our tax dollars going there. Our tax dollars are suppose to be used domestically and build a NATIONAL DEFENSE not to go on the offense unless attacked or we declare war. Until then, we stay out and defend our country.
However, each country is responsible first, for itself. There can be inter-country agreements to mutually defend like in the case of U.S. and Canada. However, we need to defend ourselves but also put resources to serve the needs our own people.
If we had put our finances domestically and not so much in war budget, we would be able to do so much more for Americans. We can have better infrastructure. We can have better health care. We can have better support services for people in need. We can even have public funded affordable housing projects that would easily put an end to our affordable housing crisis in three decades. Including eliminating the homeless problem because we can have places for all of them to go to across the country. So in 50 years, we have a lot of this solved. A very big step from where things are now. Biden doesn't control the budget or where the items in the budget are in. He's President not Congress. There is a lot of issues right now.
What we need is Presidents like Biden that isn't hell bent on totally and utterly fucking the United States and destroying it and converting it to a dictatorship under the rule of Donald Trump and despots like him. Any American that supports this notion should be simply get their asses beat to an inch from death for such stupidity. There's a reason dictatorships have never been employed in the U.S. If you suggest Trump be President, then you need to get your ass kicked... maybe your brain gets sent back to where it is suppose to be instead of being lodged in your anus. Biden is a better choice than the other. There is only two choice in U.S. politics. The Democrat or Republic party.
Our political system is a two party system. Anyone of any other can not even qualify for electoral college votes for the Presidency. Only two parties can get electoral college votes and possibly have a candidate that is elected into office. 95% of voters (other independents... ie. not aligned to any party) are members or two parties. The electoral college system would have to go if we were to have an actual 3+ party system but then we would forego all political party system and vote people on the merits of their agenda not their political affiliation. Make it possible so every person who wants to run would have to simply submit their candidacy application and if they otherwise qualify under the Constitution, then they are candidates to vote from. Let us have a dozen or even three dozen choices. Get rid of the primaries and party system politics.... more or less. So every one who is a candidate becomes available to be on the ballot (unless disqualified) and even be part of the Presidential debate. Whoever gets the most votes wins the election.
Donald Trump already demonstrated his will to attack the United States using his paramilitant followers. January 6, 2021 was close enough. Don't kid yourself, if he is willing to be a dictator on day one, he'll be that every day until he is ousted by an overthrow of him. It will be a real bloody and deadly war. That is not hyperbole. That is what it will take to remove such an asshole in power who has hundreds of thousands of religious followers who practically worship him. Thousands that literally do. This is why we need to protect our country with our votes, first and foremost. If he doesn't get back into office, that would be a key first step.
Donald Trump's trials are of his own doing. HE committed the acts that lead to his indictments. He levied war against the United States by assembling a crowd to attack the Capitol to stop the certification. This attack was always about a violent attack. He didn't even started stalking about peaceful protect until the first wave of the crowd was already underway attacking the Capitol. His whole beginning was about attacking, fighting like hell, and stopping "the steal".
What Trump did prior and on January 6, 2021, that was treason. He committed treason. Insurrection was an overt act that amounts to treason. HE did that. Although not solely by himself but with cohorts... treasonous partners. The conspiracy to overthrow the election, while it begins not quite as treason, built up to the point that he should be charged under ARTICLE III, SECTION 3 of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
He should be tried. The evidence is there to support the very definition of the words and common sense and even much of legal meaning of the words. Actual levying war occured that very day when such mob was assemble to attack. Some were armed but not all were needed to be armed. With mass, you just needed people to overwhelm the Capitol police and security. They even actually succeeded for a short limited time before they retreated because they knew there will soon be reinforcement forces that overcome a long term. Levying war doesn't require a full-on sustained war to occur. Even the attempt with the first battle that ultimately fails is still enough to charge and count as treason.
If they were successful in their full treasonous end, the law would be moot because if they overthrew the country, Trump as a dictator, the Consitution would no longer be the law of the land. At that point, you just have to overthrow and kill Donald Trump and his regime to recover the country. There would be no courts to remove him and his regime. It would be with guns and bullets and missiles, grenades, and anything else. You don't recover a country from under a dictatorship through peaceful talks. It just doesn't happen. Humans aren't evolved enough and if we were so evolved, there wouldn't be dictators and there wouldn't be a need for laws and anything else. Humans just aren't biologically evolved to that point. I doubt humans ever will be.
SOD said Either ways, there is no good presidential candidate for us PoCs. So f em all. There are some that are worse than others. You can't seem to parse the difference between an imperfect friend a f'
mortal enemy. F em all? More like f everyone and everything,
Dec 11, 23 5:27 am ·
·
____
You and everyone who thinks like you are going to make the biggest mistake in history. You are going to destroy this country. By the way was the Nader or Stein administration more to your liking?
Dec 11, 23 5:33 am ·
·
ivanmillya
"Well you are aware that not voting for Biden is a vote for the other one who has stated he will declare himself dictator on day one, will build detention camps, prosecute his political opponents, shut down any media that opposes him."
Ah yes, the "you better vote for the blue fascist or the red fascist will win" tactic. Me and the homies don't believe that electoralism will solve any of the problems we face, because electoralism is a tool of the state to help us feel that we have any sort of democratic agency. Fact is, Joe Biden has been no better for the rights of trans people, BIPOC or indigenous groups, climate change, or the working class. In all metrics, the policies of his administration have been indistinguishable from the presidents before him.
By the way you do know how to Google right? If you want to know what he has done regarding those issues that is.
Dec 11, 23 8:55 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Yes, I'm very educated on how Joe Biden has, at best, failed to meaningfully affect positive change, and at worst, has directly harmed various minority and at-risk groups in this country, at the same level if not worse than his predecessors.
Arch2, if Biden has been so great to PoCs, why is that most black males have decided to NOT vote for him? Harris and Biden have been lame ducks at best, and the sponsoring of the Genocide is just bringing all of that to light.
Jovan, Biden is not facist. Learn what the word means and what it refers to. Trump is trying to become the fascist dictator because if he becomes a dictator then his regime would actually be a fascist dictatorship as it was for Hitler and Mussolini. You claim he's sponsoring Israel's genocide. First Israel is a nation-state not the Hamas. The Hamas is essentially a sort of a Palestinean version of the Taliban. A semi-sanctioned terrorist militia. Hamas started the attack. U.S. is against terrorist cells. Since 2001, we declared war on terrorism and namely terrorist groups that attacked the U.S. on 9/11/2001 as well as any sponsors of such groups and groups with terrorist plots against U.S. and its strategic allies throughout the world. Israel is one of those allies. One that is in the middle-east. As for Netanyahu's reactive response to Hamas attacks on Israel, he ordered Israel military to execute attacks on Hamas but in a manner that it is beyond just attacking Hamas. It is simply to exterminate the Palestine once and for all. U.S. doesn't support it but we can't legally go into war against Israel for that. Don't kid yourself, once Israel does it's extermination of the Palestineans, the entirety of he arab nations will enter a unified effort to wipe Israel out of existance. You'll have Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, and even Turkey that will wipe Israel out. Congress won't agree for U.S. to enter war. At least not with the current House. It would be too much congressional resistance until 2025 (if lucky). The Republicans would do whatever to make things difficult for Biden to get things done. Democrats would need to do a better job at working together and getting things done if they regain control of both the House and Senate with powerful control of both houses of Congress. NO FUCKING WESTERN WORLD NATION SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S KILLING OF INNOCENT LIVES. NOT GOING OUT AND SPENDING BILLIONS OR TRILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS AND MEDDLING IN MIDDLE EAST AFFAIRS DOES NOT MEAN SUPPORTING GENOCIDE. The MAGA shitheads in Congress are PRECISELY the ones holding up any effort to respond. All military responses require government appropriation of money for that purpose. We do not have money for such a campaign. Our efforts are limited. The limited discretionary money allotted had been used in Ukraine, already. It was already a tight budget for that.
There are only two parties that are allowed to get electoral college votes in all 50 states. In several states, they can only issue electoral college votes to candidates of only two parties. Those two parties are Republican and Democrat. It is waste of time to vote for any person for any other party for the office of President. They can't get enough electoral college votes. Some states limits the candidates that a person can vote for to only two political parties. Until that is changed, there is no chance for a third-party candidate of ever entering office because they can't get enough electoral college votes even if they had 80% of the votes of the United States. Strange, isn't it. It is an institution for two political parties that can hold political power in the United States in that office. It is different for Congress. Trump and his MAGA is seeking to become a dictatorial regime putting an end to the United States and the United States Constitution. The power to rule the U.S. and then to rule the world. Biden is the Democrat candidate by statutory default. He's the candidate unless he personally drops from the race. No other democrat has the Democrat support that Biden has. The only other person who might get support is if Biden decides to no run for President but as VP and Harris as President. However, Biden has defeated Trump before and he has the ability to defeat Trump. Once inaugurated, if Biden feels he needs to resign, then Kamala Harris would be President. Biden and Harris at least believes in law and order and the Constitution. Trump and his MAGA does not. He doesn't care about America. He cares about only himself and ONLY himself. Not even his wife or children. That is clearly. He only cares that they don't become his enemy. He'll throw them under the bus or even have them executed if he is a dictator. The definition of dictator implies actually having unilateral power to demand anything and having it done. Dictators are effectively mortal gods allowed to do whatever unless they are removed by the people. It is essential to not vote for Trump or MAGA. Trump needs to be prevented from being President again and be convicted of the crimes he committed and go to prison. His MAGA party needs to be removed from office by not electing them. It is likely some will be in office of Congress but we must keep them from carrying out their plan to end the United States in 2025 and it is essential that MAGA does not hold office of Presidency or adequate path to holding office. This is a deadly serious situation we are in. What it means for Trump in power is a costly revolution / civil war that will cost millions of lives to restore our democracy by removing him and his MAGA. America's future and YOUR future as Americans... your very life Jovan. The MAGA people would have you killed because you represent an abomination in their eyes. This is why YOU need to vote during this election against Trump. The only vote that will count against Trump is a vote for Biden because if we don't secure him through not only popular vote but also by electoral college vote, Trump may get into office and a very deadly war will happen. You could be a casualty of such a war that would result because if he becomes a dictator, only a war will end that regime. I'm serious. This is why we need to put our vote and effort behind Biden at this time. Trump is a greater immediate threat to the United States than Al-Qaeda and ISIS combined... at this time. Those threats are still threats but Trump is a more perilous threat right now. He is the THE ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES. He is in war against the Constitution, the United States, and the institutions that the Constitution established that would be an opposition to him and his dictatorship regime. This means, he is a direct threat to you the people. You specifically is in direct danger of that regime. He and/or regime will have you killed. This is what Trump represent and the threat he actually is.
Dictator with personal army of ultra-wacky racists with many of whom are also wacky level "ultra conservatives" that have issues with all things LGBTQ+ are crazy motherfuckers who will kill you. This is Trump's followers. Some are so fucking crazy that they actually worship him. Since the establishment of the Democrat and Republican parties, there has NEVER been a single person of any other party President. There is a systemic reason for it. Several states do not recognize any party but those two parties for presidential elections. Those people would never get the electoral college votes. They just can't.
Trump isn't planning to be a dictator for only one day. He plans to be a dictator on day one not just day one. He is lying if he says that. No one seeks to be a dictator just for one day. No one seeks absolute power just for one day. Humans are genetically incapable of such morals that they would have such power and then willfully give it up. The only dictator that has only one day as dictator is a dictator that is killed on the same day. If he becomes dictator, he will have to be killed along with others. It would become a war that will result in many more dying. That is a fact. That is how it occured in EVERY other situation in all of history for removing dictators from power. In the past 10 million years, no dictator ever willfully gave up the power peacefully. Humans are too greedy genetically to be any other way. You are incapable of resisting the temptations and corruption that absolute power will cause once you have it. Once you have it, you will be corrupt. You will be tempted to abuse it. No human ever had so nor will you. Humans have not genetically evolved in 2 MILLION years so there is absolute zero chance you are that evolved.
Donald Trump frankly indicated his intent to be a dictator. The only thing he is lying about it being a dictator for one day unless he expects to be executed within 24 hours. The only ways to remove a dictator is through violent means. That's a fact. If you don't vote for Biden, then your vote then that means more votes that enables Trump to become a dictator. If you want your vote to stop Trump from being President again, then vote for Biden. Only then is there assurance that we can keep Trump from power. Any vote that is not for Biden is simply a wasted vote that allows Trump to become a majority winner enough states to garner the electoral votes. How electoral votes works is, the candidate that wins the election in each state gets the electoral votes of that states. There is an exception to that rule with a few states and only a few. If you think there is enough Democrats to win the election for Biden, the answer is no. It takes people who aren't Democrats to vote vote for Biden. It did in 2020. If you think Trump is not a danger and you have your head up your ass, you might as well be a member of this party.
Congrats with being a member of the HEAD UP ASS Party.
The systemic reasons are established for a two party system because if there were three parties of equal levels with the Democrats and Republicans, there would never be enough electoral college votes for any candidate to win the election. No one would get over have the electoral college votes. Even if one was a winner. It would be a systemic lock. We do not have a system for what to do in that situation. We would need to change the laws at Federal and State level. At such a point, it would need to be changed so whoever has the most electoral vote points wins if we were to keep the electoral college system. Three major parties would result in no simple majority votes and no one gets 50+ of the electoral votes because three popular parties with popular candidates would be too divided. You might get 28%-38% range for each of the three candidate. The electoral counts would likely be similar percentages. There is 538 electoral votes in total. 270 is required to win the Presidency. If you have three closely populr candidates of three parties, the best any may get is in the 165 to 190 range. That's significantly less than 270 to win. We would have a systematic problem.
What would need to be done then when no one can get 270 (over 50% of the electoral college votes? Many states are an all-or-nothing, so whoever gets the most votes wins the electoral votes for the state in most states with some cases for RCV. Do you see the problem? Do you see why there is systemic resistance to having three popular parties? The Electoral College system in the Presidential election then breaks.
I would propose shitcanning the electoral college system or a change where whoever gets the most electoral college votes wins the election and not a simple majority. I don't think we should at this time risk putting this country under an actual dictatorship by enabling Trump to win. Voting third-party is just helping Trump because it makes it easier for Trump to win. The only two candidates with a chance of winning 2024 is Biden and Trump. If you vote for third party, then you are apathetic about the risk a genuine dictatorship would be thinking it won't harm you.
Your sexual orientation makes you a target for the kinds of people that supports Trump. His most fanatical supporters. Those people are racist AND they are anti-LGBTQ+.
Trump and his MAGA as a dictatorial regime would be the end of the United States. Much so, that I would consider seriously about leaving the United States if that were to occur.
If "the system" would allow a third-party candidate who actually stood for the people to run and have similar media time to the other main contenders, I'm convinced they would win in a landslide. Which is why they will not be given the opportunity. Bernie Sanders was the closest we have had in recent memory and he should have won the nomination (and presidency); he's not perfect by any means but he got close enough that the powers-that-be won't let that happen again. So we're stuck with a Sophie's choice. Or a protest vote that does nothing except make the voter feel special.
honestly, It's not a sophie's choice, I've heard that lament for too long to be conned. doesn't make me feel any better, it actually makes me more scared for the future of the world. But some things are not negotiable, can't look the other way while this very democrat government is enabling a genocide again. I don't have more power than a vote to change that.
Ranked-choice voting plus mail-in ballots is how diverse electorates come to be dominated by one-party minority rule. We've seen that happen in every state in the US where it's been implemented.
Dec 11, 23 12:17 pm ·
·
Wood Guy
JLC-1, I have defended Biden since he started campaigning and I think overall he's done a great job, considering what he has had to work with. But there are a few major downsides, unending support for Israel among them, and lack of actual progress on climate change another. He is heavily beholden to the ruling class--he's a corporate Democrat, as is any Democrat who would be a viable contender. I really don't want to vote for him again but if Trump wins, as is likely at this point, things are going to get very, very bad--he has already told us exactly what he intends to do.
So you're right--it's not a true Sophie's choice; there is a clear answer to who we should vote for given the two options we are allowed to choose from.
GW, my state, Maine, was the first to use ranked-choice voting and despite complaints I think it's an elegant and fair system. But if I recall correctly, it's not allowed for federal elections.
WG, as someone in one of the very heavily politicized groups that every candidate has decided to address...things are already bad. Biden's administration has, in fact, seen things get worse for various minority groups in this country, including trans people.
Unless I'm misinterpreting your views, please don't suggest that voting in Biden again over Trump is some noble way to protect these groups from fascistic tyranny. His administration has helped to negotiate the further erosion of trans rights, the further erosion of the climate and indigenous peoples' safety and homes, and has continued the concentration camps at the border for (primarily Mexican) migrants and citizens.
I will not be made to vote between the red fascist who wants me eliminated from public life, and the blue fascist who will quietly sit by while police strip me of my liberties.
"Ranked-choice voting plus mail-in ballots is how diverse electorates come to be dominated by one-party minority rule. We've seen that happen in every state in the US where it's been implemented. "
I've not heard of this. Do you have any studies or articles that demonstrate this? Serious question. Thanks!
AK, ME & HI have RCV at the state level currently. Others with RCV options at local levels: WA, OR, CA, UT, CO, NM, MN, IL, MI, NY, VT, RI, MD. Are they dominated by one party minority rule?
RCV is outright banned in ID, MT, SD, TN & FL. Are they dominated by one party minority rule?
If there was a viable contender that has the popularity to challenge Trump ( a celebrity with a cult following ), would require someone with some celebrity status. Biden has a celebrity status due to long-term service in Congress and as VP with Obama. If there was a celebrity with perhaps even more clout and popularity than Trump, that candidate would win nomination and compete. Since the 20th century, especially since Ronald Reagan, you need some popularity/celebrity status to become President otherwise no one would vote for you. You have to be a public figure with public / name recognition. If note, you're fucked. Period. An unknown person can't win against Trump. People don't vote for people they don't even know who the fuck they are for the Office of President. So, yes, that is the way it is. So name a candidate right now who is recognized name by 300 MILLION American citizens? Until then, I'm voting for Biden because I will absolutely not vote for Trump.
Jovan, no, I think I'm pretty clearly saying that I'm no longer a fan of Biden, but he's still a far better choice than Trump (or any MAGA conservative) and that the powers that be won't allow us to have other viable options so if your "principles" won't allow you to make a strategic vote, you're doing nothing but making yourself feel good.
GW, I have not seen at all here in Maine your claim that RCGV results in minority rule. In fact here it's the minority--Republicans--who loudly oppose it. They much prefer gerrymandering to get their votes.
I have a problem when you say your principle's only makes you feel good; strategy and "the lesser of two evils" has been the game for too long and taken us to this point, not a good one. For me at least, sponsoring genocide is a stop. It's just one vote, I'm sure he'll get a lot from
other people.
In 2023, Biden's administration proposed a $32bn increase for police spending.
In 2021, Biden's first military action was to airstrike Syria, killing 22 people.
In 2021, Biden's administration tweeted that they would oppose any investigations into the "Palestinian situation", upholding Israeli apartheid in the region.
In 2022, Democratic senators purposely delayed federal same-sex marriage protection votes until after the midterms.
In 2021, the Biden DOJ defended the right of religious schools to descriminate against LGBTQ students.
In 2023, Biden urged congress to pass the KOSA (which has been suggested by the GOP would be useful to silence LGBTQ voices online)
In 2022, Biden backed an anti-abortion lawyer for federal judgeship.
And in 1982, he voted to overturn Roe v Wade because women don't have the "sole right" to bodily autonomy.
In 2022, he rallied house Democrats to make rail strikes illegal (in the midst of a huge workers strike).
In 2021, Biden opened the first migrant facility (read: Mexican child prison), after making such a huge fuss about Trump's border wall during his campaign.
I could go on for pages about this, but I think you get my point. So tell me again about how Biden is a "far better choice than Trump"? Better for whom? Seems that voting for Biden will do nothing but make yourself feel good, at the expense of workers, minorities, queer people, and everyone else... just like most every other president and candidate.
Didn't Trump say that he would always support Israel and assist in any way so they could defeat Hamas and Palestine? Seems to me if you're pro Palestine you'd have to be anti Trump.
Dec 12, 23 11:43 am ·
·
ivanmillya
I am very anti-Trump. I don't know if my comment above somehow made it seem like I support him over Biden. I don't. I simply am tired of pretending that Joe Biden was somehow a better option.
I'm not going to counter with a list of the ways Biden isn't the anti-christ, but wow, you are really digging to pretend those moments define Biden's aptitude & ethical compass for being president
Not sure that posting headlines from between 0-3 years ago counts a whole lot as "digging". These were all reported by various large news organizations, including CNN, Al Jazeera, ABC News, and actual tweets.
Dec 12, 23 11:57 am ·
·
proto
again, just because these things happened doesn't make them definitive of Biden's policy positions or intentions
trees:forest
compromise is a thing & is more valuable now then ever before as we kick ourselves in the nutz by tribalizing our civic lives
As I have said repeatedly, I'm not a fan of Biden, but he has done a lot of good things along with the horrible things. Trump/MAGA has and will do nothing good.
As they say, voting is a chess move, not a love note.
I agree to an extent, aside from the bluster and the absolute insane stupidity, can anyone point to the tangible differences between the two? Right now it seems like a zero sum game.
The point of chess is to win, draw is the last resort.
Outside of a traitor, rapist, dictator building detention camps not much why?
Dec 12, 23 5:18 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Two of those things are being litigated. The last Biden is doing as well. The wall is getting built, speech has been rendered hate, more people in detention, student debt, abortion, kids in cages, unending war, union busting....
The both sides equal BS is ridiculous. At every opportunity to game the system, Trump doubled down on self-serving special interest efforts. He even talked openly about flouting laws and dared anyone to hold him to account. Biden has attempted at every opportunity to restore the rule of law to the federal government & demonstrate that our country can operate as we have been taught that it should work. Whether he's been successful or not is not always in his hands, like any president.
Biden stabilized federal government after an attempted coup; he supported public health agencies; he encouraged the Fed to restore stability instead of urging them to goose cash flow for investors; he returned functional agency credibility to federal institutions (not partisan loyalty pledges to the Prez) along with distancing himself from the functions of the Justice department; removed us from Afghanistan; he didn't strand localities over personal grudges when they had a natural disaster; he has tempered the international disgust with US international policy; he has rallied the EU & Nato to assist UA; he helped to get the first gun regulation bill in forever thru; he passed a bill funding green jobs and infrastructure improvement nationwide that is just starting to find its way into real projects around the country; he has encouraged climate change action.
"Encouraged" the Fed. If by that you mean, he Encouraged them to crush worker wages, so nothing to manage corporate lust for profits at the expense of the working class, yeah, that's about right.
Dec 12, 23 7:50 pm ·
·
proto
Please cite what you’re referring to — it honestly sounds like hyperbole at best.
What my reference was to is Biden letting JPowell make prime rate decisions independently to calm inflation vs Trump bellowing/tweeting/entreating the Fed to lower rates so that the economy overspends during his tenure creating an artificial bubble. The result, best I can tell, is a generally cooling inflationary market that is now below 4%, down from up to 9% [monthly rate] at the high.
"In 2021, the Biden DOJ defended the right of religious schools to discriminate against LGBTQ students." Doesn't separation of church and state, a long-standing legal precedence with the courts already shut the door on that. It is nothing the DOJ can do no matter what party is in office. Religious schools are private institution operated by a religious organization like a church. There is too much politics on the issue to stir up crap. This is not a statement of condoning the practice but it is essentially a legal right shielded by the First Amendment and various elements of precedence of prior judicial ruling. So what can they LEGALLY do under the current laws INCLUDING case law and judicial precedence. It is up to the religious institution to change their position to not discriminate the LGBTQ+ community. FYI: Not all churches conducts such acts but there's nothing Biden can do. By the way, the DOJ does not belong to ANY President. It BELONGS to the UNITED STATES. So please stop propagating Fox New, Trumpism. It isn't Biden's DOJ nor was it Trump's. It never belong to either. A President is just an elected public official of the federal government holding an office... that happens to be in charge of administration of the Executive Branch. Just like the governor doesn't own any state agency. They just manage oversight over them. All agencies and departments of the Executive Branch belongs to the United States never a singular person under the United States Constitution.
proto, it's widely acknowledged by less than conservative economists, that the goal of raising interest rates, is an attempt to suppress worker wages.
"Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell plans to address sky-high inflation by hiking interest rates — acknowledging that doing so will suppress wages and worker power. It's a response that will force workers to bear the brunt of the inflation crisis."
Dec 13, 23 8:08 am ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Additionally, Biden, despite whatever talking points you're on the side of, has zero impact on The Fed. They act independent of the executive branch, and Powell was a Trump appointee.
Inflation did not have much to do with the money supply, and history will bear this out, but had to do with corporate seeing an opportunity to take advantage of the pandemic by leveraging supply chain issues to grow profits and punish the working class.
Dec 13, 23 8:12 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Lmao "encouraged" climate action, as if he wasn't also responsible for the largest oil & gas lease sale in US history. "Tempered the international disgust with US international policy". Considering four of the largest players in the "international" community are currently supporting a genocide that's fueled primarily by the US, I couldn't give less of a shit about whether they like us or not. They should be disgusted by themselves as well.
It is amazing how you can read in the absolute worst possible spin when it’s convenient to blast your perceived opponent.
“it's widely acknowledged by less than conservative economists, that the goal of raising interest rates, is an attempt to suppress worker wages.”
No, it is not the goal. But it is an unfortunate side effect that we have to stomach to tamp down inflation. Serious people have to acknowledge that. It is childish to pretend there will be a solution to inflation that doesn’t hurt any wage earner short term. But no one wins if inflation just continues to accelerate. My guess is you have no idea how to curb inflation and not hurt the working class…you just like to paint the people doing the hard work as failures from your fault-free high horse.
Just when I think I have a slight glimmer of understanding the US political world... I read one post here and loose all hopes. It's like mental kryptonite... just can't do it.
We have several parties here who are all very visible and active. 3 Have a fighting chance at the big job (more options at provincial level) but ask me who the leader of any of them and I draw a blank unless they are currently sitting in the fancy unicorn-adorned throne.
How many millions of people are going to have to suffer for your willful, absolute, insane stupidity.
I am out of here. I can't suffer fools. That is what you are. Willful, pig headed fools.
No one else is going to deserve what happens but you are.
Just remember when you are on that train headed to a detention camp to be reeducated after you have been deamed undesirable you bought your own ticket.
PS You just defended that lunatic (2 are being litagated)and you are not insane? On second thought you might not have to be reeducated. Maybe you could be a guard.
Arch2, NOT OUR FUCKING COUNTRY to deal with. We don't own the world. We don't have the right to police it no matter how much political bullshit propagated that idea. We do not have any tax dollars to spend on Israel. We used up the limited discretionary funds allowed to be used to respond to such matters with Ukraine, earlier this year. Congress is who you need to harp to. Take it up with the House of Representatives. Until then, shut the fuck up and quit bitching at us who has absolutely no authority to do a fucking thing regarding the issue until November of 2024. All we get to do is vote. Bitching at us now, is hopeless waste of fucking time. None of us here has any clout in Congress or the President. All we are are shitheads sitting in front of a computer screen being assholes to each other. Am I making my point fucking clear enough.
1. What you posted was a half truth. Those pictures are in Gaza not the Southern border of the USA. 2. 2 minutes on Google. 2 minutes on Google. 3. You are being played. 4. You know nothing about me. As a matter of fact I have a proposal for a better world that I have spent 50 years on and I am not going to dox myself and post it because everyone on here is space deaf. 5. You don't understand that politics is the art of compromise. 6. You don't get everything you want if you want to govern effectively. 7. You are out of your depth.
Here is a more complete picture minus the inflammatory images used to confuse the ignorant fools like you. You are being played.
In a statement, White House spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández said the administration did not have "determined policy positions" in the congressional negotiations.
"The White House has not signed off on any particular policy proposals or final agreements, and reporting that ascribes determined policy positions to the White House is inaccurate," Fernández
Hernández said. "The President has said he is open to compromise and we look forward to continued conversations with Senate negotiators as we work toward a bipartisan package."The Biden administration's willingness to entertain broad, restrictive changes to U.S. asylum and immigration laws, including measures resembling Trump-era policies, may increase the likelihood of Republicans supporting its foreign aid package. But even if a bipartisan deal is forged in the Senate, it's unclear if the resulting legislation would win approval in the House.House Republicans earlier this year passed a bill known as H.R. 2 that included much stricter asylum and border provisions, including the reinstatement of migrant family detention and the so-called "Remain in Mexico" policy. It also included drastic limits on the humanitarian parole authority, which the Biden administration has used to welcome hundreds of thousands of refugees and migrants from Afghanistan, certain Latin American countries, Haiti and Ukraine.
The administration's openness to negotiate restrictive immigration changes with Republicans has angered migrant advocates, progressive Democrats and Latino lawmakers, who have urged the White House and Senate Democrats to refrain from agreeing to permanent asylum restrictions. "Destroying the asylum system will not fix the southern border," Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal said Tuesday. "We did not spend years fighting this agenda under Trump only to give in to Senate Republicans' extreme demands now."
It is called governance. You are out of your depth of understanding of politics, negotiating, and basically everything else.
For the ignorant the operant phrases are: 1. Bipartisan deal 2. Senate Republicans' extreme demands now."
Get it? Good Grief.
Dec 12, 23 9:58 pm ·
·
____
Boomer fuck yeah as in real yippie. No that is not a typo a yippie is a political hippie a real liberal socialist not a sunshine liberal.
Dec 12, 23 10:05 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
You. Are. Dumb. I never stated it was the Southern Border, numbnuts. Did Genocide Joe not tip you off as to the location, and the context for our implication in said genocide?
Arch2, NOT OUR FUCKING COUNTRY to deal with. We don't own the world. We don't have the right to police it no matter how much political bullshit propagated that idea. We do not have any tax dollars to spend on Israel. We used up the limited discretionary funds allowed to be used to respond to such matters with Ukraine, earlier this year. Congress is who you need to harp to. Take it up with the House of Representatives. Until then, shut the fuck up and quit bitching at us who has absolutely no authority to do a fucking thing regarding the issue until November of 2024. All we get to do is vote. Bitching at us now, is hopeless waste of fucking time. None of us here has any clout in Congress or the President. All we are are shitheads sitting in front of a computer screen being assholes to each other. Am I making my point fucking clear enough.
Wasn't there a meme that went something like "Listening to liberals discuss how everything is just so difficult to fix (israel-palestine, border crisis, gun violence etc etc) makes clear how slavery went on for so long"?
The republicans are vicious but at least they get things done. Too bad its not what we want.
Let's not forget Obama - who i supported - did jack shit about abortion. Democrats are more invested, interested in winning some kind fleeting and feck less moral position, rather than achieving material gains for working class. The ruling class will always tell you the path to salvation ruins through compromise.
I do appreciate Obama for, well Obamacare, but thats pretty much it. Nothing else done about abortion, immigration and lets not forget the drone warfare idea that killed thousands.
And yes, material gains are perhaps supposed to be too low-brow for liberal intelligentsia.
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.“ Sen McConnell 2010. [this is probably the only win for the GOP, the Party of NO…policy wise, they haven’t and continue to not be able to advance any coherent platforms. They passed a tax bill to benefit the rich: woohoo!]
But yeah, let’s throw the failure to pass a remarkably popular policy platform at Obama’s feet for failing to overcome the very intentional & very organized obstruction under a Congress that held a legitimate voting majority for Obama for about two months. Obamacare fwiw is a huge compromise from what it was intended to be. But it offers essential small victories that people of all stripes, esp those living with low or no wages, still appreciate (pre-existing conditions, preventative care coverage, etc).
Doubling down on absolutist policies only ensures nothing gets done. Stop encouraging a politics of posturing for media clicks.
Obama, on day one, could have codified Roe, did he? No. He had 60 votes, an overwhelming support of the party, and the country. A goddamn layup, and he's a guy that could hit 3s. So don't bore me with Senator Turtle.
@jovan I hope you can understand that proposing compromise over doing nothing doesn’t equal accepting fascism as acceptable.
Dec 13, 23 11:36 am ·
·
ivanmillya
Except it does when you're accepting compromise between legislators who are writing laws that restrict the ability of groups of people to exist (republican congress) and the (democrat) executive branch who happily passes them, all while saying "it's okay! We're compromising!"
You are worried about republicans fiddling with public elementary school libraries but cool with Hamas? The cognitive dissonance is wild.
Dec 13, 23 11:53 am ·
·
proto
The gun safety law...was it not worthwhile? It didn't gather significant traction on gun regulation. It was a baby step in the right direction. One day that step will matter. Similarly, LGBTQ rights don't materialize overnight. But same sex marriage became a thing because the country started to see humanity in their fellow gay citizens. It happened over time. It's not done either. Similarly, change will happen over time on other issues. Intractability and purity of purpose rarely moves the needle, if at all, where baby steps actually DO move the needle. One doesn't have to be amoral to compromise.
Also, please stop hyperbolizing your statements ("and the (democrat) executive branch who happily passes them"). It delegitimizes your stated opinions when the assertions made are not true because you turned them up to 11 for effect. I suspect you have a reasonable basis for your opinion that isn't hyperbole; please stick with that.
Dec 13, 23 12:13 pm ·
·
____
He has passed more positive legislation since LBJ maybe even FDR. Not perfect but forward movement. Progress is infuriating slow. It takes perseverance and tenacity.
Dec 13, 23 12:17 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
"A fantasy" well, yes, you may be right. The reality is that Democratic party elites would rather campaign on saving Roe, than actually saving Roe. They are actually more interested in campaigning on LGBTQ and Trans issues, thank actually doing anything tangible for those issues. They are actually more interested in campaigning on getting out of endless wars, immigration issues, than actually legislating for the same. And they are actually more interested in talking about student loan debt, than actually doing anything about student loan debt.
As for day 1. I don't know if you know how Congress works, but he had a fillibuster proof majority, 60 votes in the senate. On day one.
Dec 13, 23 6:03 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
And Biden. He decided to play games with Build Back Better. He decided to cede ground to the two most duplicitous DINOs in his party, and let them turn something that could have wrecked the idiocy of child poverty, and solidified child tax credits. Paid family and medical leave, gone. Free community college, gone. Universal pre-k, gone.
Dec 13, 23 6:13 pm ·
·
proto
Who did the hard work leaving Afghanistan?
Dec 13, 23 6:20 pm ·
·
proto
As for obama's super majority, it was hampered by byrd's absence for health, kennedy's death, and franken not getting seated for 7mos...wiki says it totaled 72 days before the next cycle's election. How long do you think it takes to make significant legislation?
Dec 13, 23 6:29 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Again. I'm sorry, but an issue that has been infinitely important to most women in this country, and you want to tell me, that Democrats didn't have legislation already constructed, knowing that O'Connell was aiming to make Obama a one term? OK. Sure. I'll go with that absolute lack of critical foresight. Typical. But then again, they'd have to actually campaign on issues dealing with real substance, like taxes, wealth redistribution, card check, minimum wage, ending homelessness, child poverty, and oh by the way, pissing off the donor class and ruling elites.
As for the super majority;
February 4, 2010: Republican Scott Brown's election to the Senate ended the Democratic super-majority. November 2, 2010: 2010 general elections, in which Republicans regained control of the House while the Democrats remained in control of the Senate.
Dec 13, 23 7:46 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
Afghanistan. Out of the kettle, and into the Ukraine. Got billions for weapons, nothing for you and me. What are the material solutions for America's problems by getting involved in Ukraine again?
Nordstream pipeline. Great for the planet there Joe. But hey, as long as Blackrock and the Military Industrial Complex is happy.
The solution is assassinate Putin. Then remove his regime. Then get out of the business of policing the world. Just one bullet and a good skilled sniper and Putin is done and over. Stop wasting billions when a $100,000 and a 50 caliber bullet and rifle is what you need. You get the idea. Russia will finally have a real election and maybe even back off from Ukraine. Then U.S. also needs to make material steps of getting out of the business of policing the world and spend time taking care of itself.
Dec 13, 23 7:59 pm ·
·
proto
b3ta, your bad faith responses are unfortunate. "I'll go with that absolute lack of critical foresight." Sure, make up your own story. Your prerogative to speculate. Just don't pretend it's actually factual.
At least you didn't try to argue leaving Afghanistan wasn't Biden's direction or try to double down that Obama had two years of super majority.
Dec 13, 23 8:58 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
At least you didn't try present Biden's getting the US out of a lost cause, and into another lost cause was to our benefit. As to bad faith, your selective memory is disconcerting. Obama and Democrats lacked the fortitude and vision to get Roe codified, anyone saying otherwise has tongue and lips firmly planted on the donkey's taint.
When was the super majority again? Wasn't that in the middle of a recession that borderlined depression that was caused by the decisions made during the time period of the previous President?
Dec 13, 23 9:07 pm ·
·
b3tadine[sutures]
God and Democrats love incrementalism, maybe it's the mental part?
The only way to codify it so it would be supreme court proof is an amendment to the United States Constitution. Unless Democrats had no less than two thirds majority in BOTH houses would that ever get codified there. Republicans won't vote for it. It's not just passing a bill into law. You need such a majority that the Democrats needs 0 votes in both houses from the Republicans. There hasn't been such in how f---ing long if ever?
If you want to make it a right, it has to be in the Constitution as an amendment. Otherwise, a mere law would be stricken as unconstitutional by this Supreme Court.
The same party that is actually what is keeping things from happening. The same party that took 15 times to select their Speaker of the House earlier in 2023 just to vote him out making him the only speaker of the house to be removed from the position following a motion to vacate and third-shortest term as Speaker of the House in U.S. history. The same party that caused the government shutdowns during Obama's time? The same party that couldn't fucking pass a budget and had to resort to a continuing resolution since September. If you ever actually read the Constitution of the United States, you would know where the responsibility for budget lies.... in the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Which party runs the house? What party spends precious time on the congressional floor filibustering on nonsensical shit that has nothing to do with responsibilities of Congress and fighting with themselves in the most asinine way. Even though the Democrats have from time to time wasted time and done some stupid shit, the Republicans have been consistently stupid. They couldn't govern ever during Trump's time. Anything that got done was because of Democrats. At least, any time since George W. Bush was President. Back then, both parties were responsible to some degree. Currently, only the Democrats actually function in a responsible manner to some measure, albeit there are room for improvement. Ever since Newt Gingrich, the Republicans have been on a downward spiral to the inane, stupid, and ridiculous. They have been everything fucked up on purpose. When they do anything, they fuck up consistency. Almost, like it is on purpose or absolute incompetence. While a few dinosaurs of respectable Republicans existed but they are almost all retiring from politics and most already left. A good percentage of intellectually competent Republicans have left the party. Those that remain are mostly the worst of the worst shitheads in America. People too f---ed up to be accepted in any respectable society. People who are too f---ed up to be good law abiding citizens. They wouldn't be respected in the Democrat party because there is a big cultural disconnect between responsible adults and lawless derelict stupid f---tards. Trump is popular among these asshats because he is a lawless crook that is f---ing them for his own gain. What real accomplishment has the Republicans done since Ronald Reagan --> Bush jr. era? This party did have some sensible values albeit loaded with issues. On the other hand, Democrats have been doing more domestically. If you want to go fight Israel or Hamas, then just go volunteer yourself to fight and even die. That is your personal choice. Don't expect U.S. taxpayer dollars to be spent fighting either Israel or Hamas or both. We just aren't going to be fighting this war. Neither side wants us. The innocent people also don't want us. They want U.N. intervention. They don't want ugly America involved. They do want Israel to stop indiscriminate killing. We all do. Republicans are the ones holding up funds for responding to the Israel issue as well as Ukraine. More specifically, the MAGA sect of the Republican party who controls the party by the balls because most of the other Republicans are spineless . They have empty sacks between their legs. MAGA wackos are incapable of being negotiated with because they are incapable of acting and behaving as responsible adults. They are in large part a terrorist group and are themselves sponsors of the insurrections. These people are enemies of the United States so we need to simply send these assholes to a blacksite prison on a floating ship in international waters having the worst days of the remainder of their lives until and then tossed overboard after they die as food for the fish. They are not in Congress to accomplish anything good. They are there to undermine the United States. This is because they are there serving DONALD J. TRUMP who plans to become a dictator. So again, they have no purpose for good. They are enemies of the Constitution, and our democracy centered Republic.
1. My hair is longer. 2. Insert image of handwriting on a wall with characters with question marks in bubbles over their heads. 3. Your hearts are in the right place. 4. You just don't understand the realities of an asymmetrical social/political landscape and how to deal with it.
Trump was not playing nice with the deep state. That’s the true reason why they wanted him gone so bad. He is a bid goon with a self centered business minded approach, but he his business interests (development) were not in alignment with the main US business interests (military
industrial complex )
The people that continue to participate in this 'discussion'. Do you think think you're going to change anyone's mind on this? It sure seems like you're just 'debating' to hear yourself talk.
I'm wondering what any of you are actually doing to make the killing stop.
I can't even get anyone to actually read the initial post regarding International Law, and what is and isn't genocide, or what is allowed in an occupier/occupied relationship. So, do me a favor, at least argue in good faith, and do the thread some fucking decency and don't engage in hypotheticals.
Good point. It is starting to get just annoying than changing of any sort of opinion. I trust Biden over Trump. No one else comes close to being a viable candidate to getting enough votes to win the election so it would harm Biden more than Trump. Trump's followers are largely religiously devout to him so they'll vote for him. Biden's supporters are sane human beings, mostly. So most won't be religiously devoted to Biden like a religious cult. Without that level of devout religious following, Biden's supporters are more likely to vote more freely. All supporters of Trump WILL vote for Trump. If they are still supporting him then nothing will change their mind. They are so devoted that they are practically worshipping Donald Trump. Joe Biden doesn't have religious followers. Joe's supporters supports his overall agenda not necessarily everything. This means they are more likely to have some percentage of them that will vote for some other person. That plays to Trump's benefit more than Biden. Trump's supporters are religious zealots of Trump as their God. Just one vote is all it takes to make the difference who wins the election.
Now, I am not blaming the OP of this thread. I do find the thread's direction is kind of going into a more annoying direction. It's feeling like some here are begging us, me for example, to stop the war in Israel-Palestine. For damn sake, I do not have any authority to get U.S. involved or get anyone in the U.S. leadership level to do anything.
Unless you are some kid in elementary school, nothing you write to the President goes all the way to the President. No matter who is in office. It just doesn't happen. The President doesn't actually receive letters from regular adult American citizens who are not writing on behalf of a government agency. Your letter would otherwise get filtered out by administrative staff under the President and you may or may not get a response. If you do, it is more like a generic pre-canned response letter where they say, thank you for your letter and we'll consider your input among others and pretty much no committal to anything you said. Basically, a nice "thank you but we're too busy to really bother the President with actually sending this on to him or her to personally read and respond to". It's more like those auto-sent messages you get confirming receipt of the message. This doesn't mean they'll do anything with it other than send it to the circular file.
Every member of Congress has received probably no less than 10 letters on this matter from constituents just this week alone. What is one more letter going to do that a 1000+ letters haven't already done or already failed to do? I'm not wasting time writing a letter just so it be thrown on the file that gets shredded and put in the circular file to be dumped with rest of the trash next trash pickup. I'm pretty much not going to hold my breath.
I can't even get anyone to actually read the initial post regarding International Law, and what is and isn't genocide, or what is allowed in an occupier/occupied relationship. So, do me a favor, at least argue in good faith, and do the thread some fucking decency and don't engage in hypotheticals.
I read your initial post and it's links. It's the only critical thinking going on in this thread. The rest of the thread, and the rest of your posts are just shouting 'I'm right and you're wrong'.
Again, what is anyone involved in this shouting match actually doing to try and make positive change in this horrible situation. Simply shouting at each other online isn't accomplishing anything. You're not 'educating' or 'informing' others about what's going on. All you're doing is shouting to others that already agree with you while making other disregard your views.
You're being disingenuous. First, I'm not shouting. Second, I'm right, because I'm actually citing reality, facts, and the laws the world established after The Holocaust. I'm not both siding this, I'm actually acknowledging a reality, and hypothetical, that Americans would never accept, and never acknowledge.
In the meantime, the carnage of civilians continues as part of a "total solution" by the Israeli government, the army, and with the aid of other nations such as US.
The US is actively participating in it and supplying money, military backing, ammunition, and immoral
support! Nearly twenty thousand people have been killed. Most of them are children, mothers, and the elderly. Does that fact count for anything? Do you have children?
Because Israel was and is a U.S. ally. The Hamas weapons, some like machine guns were U.S. made that Taliban acquired sometime during the end of Trump's era and early days of Biden's presidency during the pulling out of Afghanistan, and Hamas acquired from Taliban. Israel has always acquired weapons from U.S. as an ally nation-state that had been instrumental in the war in Iraq. Israel has been a strategic and tactical ally. Israel's use of those weapons for atrocities is probably reason for discontinuing any further aid or involvement with the Middle East. Israel is a villain now as is Hamas. Put it simply, no one is a good guy. As a nation, it is a waste of our resources. It would be time to say, we are done giving aid or otherwise having any further involvement. Let UN and the international community address it and take the lead with the response. The one thing we need to do is remove the nuclear weapons from Israel. Denuclearize Israel and Iran. We can keep close by regarding any nuclear weapon deployment from Iran. Other than that, we stay out it.
Dec 14, 23 6:03 am ·
·
sameolddoctor
The US has many allies but it supports Israel as if it were a US state. Actually a lot of US states do not receive as much attention as much as Israel does.
I always had a lot of respect for Israel as a nation with its innovation, technology etc, but it seems like a load of BS, as the only reason all of that is possible there is with US funds.
OK, let's cut to the chase. Have you considered the national security implications if Israel's enemies (all of the middle east and the Islamic terrorists throughout) got a hold of the nukes Israel that are based on U.S. technology but made by Israel and packaged on Israel's Jericho series Missile platform and other WMDs in Israel's possession? Issues long before Biden was president and goes back before he was in Congress.
What would happen if we abandon Israel, entirely?
It can be more concerning what happens if Israel falls and that stuff gets proliferated by terrorists.
Dec 14, 23 4:49 pm ·
·
sameolddoctor
No one is talking about abandoning Israel, but curbing military aid. For a country that has been around 78 years, their economy is doing quite well and they can take care of their shit. Alternatively if the US still wanted to be in bed with them, there is still no reason for abetting genocide. Our power could be used to create a harmonious situation for both the Israelis and Palestinians. But oh wait, then the military industrial complex wont survive. Scratch all that.
Indeed, Israel's GDP per capita is 52k per person, which is better off than most countries. Cut them loose, and support countries with actual poverty.
I can support curbing aid or conditions to aid where innocent people are not to be target and that Israel is to use different tactics to more surgical targeting Hamas without collateral harm to non combatants. Israel is a nation-state and should apply higher standards. While Hamas, a non-government are terrorists and not a nation state, we can't order them to adhere to such convention, but Israel is more than capable of addressing Hamas without indiscriminately killing non combatants. They have the training so there is no excuse. I also support a shift towards moving some of that support elsewhere perhaps as you said. If I was President of U.S., I would do what I said. Penalty for failure can be harsh such as international sanctions, embargoes, etc. We would keep necessary contingency for making sure as much possible that certain things are not getting into the wrong hands. Our military industrial complex won't go out of business.... there is always another a--hole that needs to get his/her/their ass kicked.
Sorry, this map is stupid at best, racist at worst.
The "democracy" in the US is flailing quite a bit when 75% of the country does not want this genocide to happen but Genocide Joe is still arming Israel to the hilt. If you think 18,000 dead civilians = democracy, we dont really want it.
A map, that's what we're working from here, seriously? I am curious, by who's definition of "democracy" are we working with here? What are the interests of the west in those countries that are the least democratic?
Warning: quite stingy but to the point as an opinion piece.
"This Advent, this season of Festivals of Light, celebrating the sun’s return, is a reenactment of the foundational metaphoric tales of our cultures, only in a macabre, mocking travesty. As MLK did, and would again put it, it is the liturgy of a final approach to spiritual death."
Congratulations to Israel for dragging us into another genocide on poor, hungry folk in the name of "enabling commerce". Pretty sure Genocide Joe and his buddies are very happy. now.
Genocide Central
What is and what isn't genocide? What are the responsibilities of the occupier, when it comes to the occupied?
Regulations: Art. 43
The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
When It Is Just to Begin to Fight
Occupation Law prohibits an occupying power from initiating armed force against its occupied territory. By mere virtue of the existence of military occupation, an armed attack, including one consistent with the UN Charter, has already occurred and been concluded. Therefore the right of self-defense in international law is, by definition since 1967, not available to Israel with respect to its dealings with real or perceived threats emanating from the West Bank and Gaza Strip population. To achieve its security goals, Israel can resort to no more than the police powers, or the exceptional use of militarized force, vested in it by IHL. This is not to say that Israel cannot defend itself—but those defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defense in international law. As explained by Ian Scobbie:
To equate the two is simply to confuse the legal with the linguistic denotation of the term ”defense.“ Just as ”negligence,“ in law, does not mean ”carelessness” but, rather, refers to an elaborate doctrinal structure, so ”self-defense” refers to a complex doctrine that has a much more restricted scope than ordinary notions of ”defense.“
To argue that Israel is employing legitimate “self-defense” when it militarily attacks Gaza affords the occupying power the right to use both police and military force in occupied territory. An occupying power cannot justify military force as self-defense in territory for which it is responsible as the occupant. The problem is that Israel has never regulated its own behavior in the West Bank and Gaza as in accordance with Occupation Law.
United Nations
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
I'll tell you what, my propaganda detector has become MUCH more sensitive in the last few years of social media. By which I mean: almost every bit of news I see on SoMe about what is going on in Gaza is obvious bullshit intended to rile folks up, one way or the other.
That said, I firmly believe the government of Israel's response to October 7 has been far too aggressive and destructive to human life.
I would agree Donna. If each side is going to fight they should be focused on the combatants and actively working to avoid civilians.
Each sides views that everyone is a combatant is pure evil and needs to be stopped ASAP. This starts with stopping what Israel is currently doing.
There may be some BS in social media about Gaza, but its hard to dispute the accounts of on-the-ground reporters (about 80 of whom have been killed by Israel already). And yes "the right of Israel to protect itself" has been taken a bit too far by some (ie the US Government)
I just wish each side would care that every time they f-around their civilian's are the ones who find out. :(
Being neutral is certainly “safe” in some ways, but it’s not morally correct regardless of who you piss off.
Being neutral is certainly “safe” in some ways, but it’s not morally correct regardless of who you piss off.
One of the disadvantages of posting your real views with your real name is that in this case, I am pretty sure you put off all my wealthy Jewish clientele. Careful how you respond. I’m Jewish, and depending on your response, I may bring a very similar attention to that response to what Musk got after his tweet…
Interesting how criticizing the literal genocide being committed by Israel is somehow tantamount to antisemitism.
no genocide being committed. Israel is not out to eradicate the palestinian people. i know that's what you want to believe, but that's not what is happening. Just like taking a dose of chemo is about killing the cancer, not the whole organism.
That you used cancer. Interesting, and on brand choice.
Seeing that it got deleted from the other post, I will put this here
US envoy Hochstein says offshore gas belongs to the Palestinian people
Now it is confirmed as to what this was all for. More gas.
This is a very legit source, and yeah based in Geneva.
Here's what's weird. We know Nazis committed genocide, we know of genocidal acts of Japan, and killing of civilians but all parties in the war. We've rightly condemned those actions, they were both aggressors - despite what we know about the acts by western governments after WWI against Germany - and yet almost no one says Hiroshima and Nagasaki was justified, or that those German civilians had it coming in Dresden. These were just as valid for war crimes, but when you're the "victor", or loser as in Vietnam, the terms get dictated by western powers.
Oh, another thing, I'm not bickering, nor blocking dissent.
i really don't think there is any decent on this. It's a bad situation and it needs to be stopped.
I was waiting for someone to post here. I'm firmly pro-Israel so bring it on.
Great, I guess 7k+ dead brown kids do not matter to you then.
careful now. my people can cancel you
Lol
Bulgar, I don’t have any issue with the people of Israel. I *am* against how much bombing of innocent people the government of Israel (aided by the US) is doing. Does that make me antisemitic, or a mealy-mouthed white liberal, or both, or what? I really struggle with the language here. What does “pro-Israel “ mean?
I'm against both sides of this 'war'. They're both being evil. Right now Israel is being more evil. That doesn't make Hamas and Palestine not evil.
Let me ask, are Americans evil?
As a nation - yes. When taken as individuals - it depends.
Against both sides? How diplomatic of you. Hamas attacked Israel and there is the "neutral" argument. Hilarious. When terrorists hide behind human shields, it is better to get rid of the terrorists at all costs. Its like a cancer. You either eradicate it completely despite harming good cells, or you deal with it bit by bit until it comes back stronger and stronger and eventually kills you. Am I sad innocent people are getting hurt? Of course, I'm not a monster. But I think what is happening is absolutely necessary for the better future in long run of the region.
I'm not being diplomatic BulgarBlogger.
Bother sides have been / are being genocidal monsters.
I can't support either and want to see both stopped. I do find it odd that some people are basically saying 'well my side is being less of a genocidal monster so they're the one you should side with'
I know several of you here will say 'yeah but look at what this side did - the other side is better' Or 'well this side has a right to ...' That's a foolish and narrow minded argument meant to promote 'your' side and lessen you of any guilt. Both sides have done / continue to do horrible things. Neither side deserves support.
You're not going to change my mind on this.
great and neither will you. and I will keep on responding with the same level of rigor because Hamas is a cancer that must be eliminated all costs.
God forbid you get sick of cancer... I don't want to hear you crying to the doctors (or others) about the morality of why chemo is harming your good cells...
Israel's response is entirely appropriate and is akin to dosing a terrorist regime with the equivalent of chemotherapy. Hopefully the Palestinian organism can persevere without terrorist CELLS (pun intended)
Hamas is a cancer. So is Israel's response to Hamas. You wouldn't give yourself cancer to fight the cancer you already have. All that will happen is you die of cancer.
Really? Israel's response is a cancer? I can't debate with a pacifist. That's what you are.
Oh stop trolling.
I'm not a pacifist. Far from it.
If you use a cancer to fight another cancer don't be surprised when all you get is death.
I wouldn’t say I’m a pacifist but I do think both sides are being evil. I want innocent people to not be killed or terrorized or starved to death. That’s it.
"Your people" couldn't cancel a Halal food truck in NYC, so stop the threats, and grow up.
I'm sorry that you disagree with the UN, perhaps you and Gal Gadot can sing Imagine, at the Hague?
With all due respect Donna I disagree. Both sides actively target non combatants. That's evil.
The non combatants on each side are NOT evil.
I agree with Chad.
ButtheadBlogger, "Hamas is a cancer that must be eliminated all costs." ( Why not ask for U.S. assistance with vaporizing weapon targets with those laser devices? ) Why not just send in a team of soldiers to shoot the Hamas bad guys? Why not a more surgical strategy than just sending missiles?
There's better more targeted approaches than what is being done right now.
My take is the Hamas et al are bad guys in this situation as well as Israel. The only 'good guys' are the innocent non-combatants... often the victims in this bullshit conflict that should never have happened at all. After U.S. gets any American hostage out, it should stay out of the conflict. However, U.N. may be involved but the U.S. should stay out of it. We are not wanted and U.S. and UK should stay out of it. We made the mess by creating Israel in the first place as Israel had been defeated and destroyed as a country for centuries. Our continued involvement is just going to be a flipping the bird to Islam as insensitively imposing the creation of Israel was. This does not mean it should prevent volunteers from U.S. to fight. Officially, we should stay out of the dispute. The UN with non-US, international interest should lead an UN involvement in the matters. U.S. interest should be limited to valid national security interest of the U.S. and American non-combatants. Volunteer American citizens that are combatants shall understand they are taking this high risk voluntarily without expectation on U.S. intervention. I think U.S. should minimize its role after the American hostages are released. If Israel and Palestine goes to full on war, it is their program. War itself is ugly. Some can say war is a humanitarian crime. However, we are no saints and we are not the parties with legitimacy for peace making. We are warmongering barbarians. All we do is make things more heated. We should keep our eyes open and watch for any nuclear weapon deployment or other use of WMDs or even the hint of actual intent to use. We should otherwise stay out of it. We are not the world's police, we should discontinue acting like it. Our own country needs attention to addressing its own internal issues.
Yes and no. If you create the problem, shouldn't you be responsible for helping to clean it up? On the other side of the coin, the US sticks its face where it doesn't belong continually, and this time it's wearing thin.
I think y'all already know my thoughts on this, but just to add some hard data:
TL;DR: This long statement effectively demonstrates the systematic removal, displacement, and murder of Palestinians by Israel and its western allies.
Israel continues to celebrate the Nakba, an event in the late 1940s which ethnically cleansed 700,000 Palestinian people (via forceful expulsion from their homes in what would later become Israel's land). Israeli historians have debated about whether this is considered "ethnic cleansing", but have since legitimized some of it as "partial ethnic cleansing".
As a result of the 1947-49 war, Palestine (long established as a state, with its own flag, governing body, etc.) was partitioned out by the UN in order to give now-vacated (read: ethnically cleansed) land to the state of Israel, wherein the remainder of in-situ Palestinians either moved or were forced into Gaza. On and off for decades since, Israel has switched between abandoning and blockading, completely bombarding, and otherwise violently antagonizing the Gaza Strip with a lot of financial help from the United States and other parties.
Of course, the nature of a self-governing Palestine in Gaza—along with the notion of a functioning military, agencies, etc.—is half-lying anyway. The Gaza strip was heavily controlled directly by Egyptian forces starting in 1949 until 1967, when it saw its current occupation by Israel.
To suggest that this is a war between two equally bad and competent nation-states entirely denies the fact that Palestine has not had a functioning state for decades, being beholden to whatever agreements other nations came up with. Hamas began in the 1960s under Israeli occupation as an insurgency group (and admittedly was anti-semitic). Its mission statement has, in more recent years, been entirely re-written to specifically direct that Hamas is fighting against the state of Israel, and not on the premise of Judaism as an international group of people.
If you would play the "both sides are bad" argument about Israel and Palestine, I wonder if you'd do the same about the Jewish armed resistance in Warsaw in 1943; or the Sioux and Cheyenne violent resistance against the United States in the 1870s; or the Haitian Slave Revolt in the 1790s; or... the list goes on and on. Violent revolt against oppressors does not make both sides equally bad. If you think that, I'd wager that you've never felt the hand of violent oppression, and are just speaking out of turn.
*steps off my soapbox*
Neither side and no side should have claim to that area. It doesn't belong to them. It belongs to the divine which they believe in... which by the way is the same being or character although from their own perspectives.They can't learn to share the sandbox with each other like good little children learned to do in preschool and elementary school. They can't bother themselves to live together without trying to kill each other. They aren't willing so maybe they both should be evicted and spend a 1000 years (nice religious number) exiled to learn to live peaceful with one another. If they can't, it be extended for another 1000 years until they give up the hatred to each other and the bullshit. Act like bad little children then be treated as such. There holy book all speaks to compassion and love and to care for one another. What is so damn hard about that. Kids learn to do this. What is so fucked up in their heads that they can't do what little 6 year olds have learned to do?
You don't see white people scalping the heads of native Americans, today, do you? U.S. was bad guys in that story. However, there were bad actors on both sides. That is with any war. This is why there should be one human race nation but no land ownership. As we all are just tenants as mortal race. We should have one nation. If we don't, we must forget the knowledge of everything we learned in the age of civilization and return to the way we lived in the days before the ice age and how we were in equilibrium with nature. No guns. No missiles and rockets. No bombs. Just spears and such basic stone age Era tools we used to survive, hunt, etc. Learn to be one nation of the human race living and coexisting together with all our cultural differences and beliefs or return to stone age Era of living. I prefer a United Earth nation with regional, subpolitical bodies but federated into unity for the common good of humanity.
As you see, I personally believe these kinds of issues should be resolved in peace. I think Israel and the Hamas have been acting in malice. In my opinion, the U.S. should not be involved. Why? By creating Israel (with the UK), we messed with the meddled into affairs we shouldn't have. Until we created Israel as a country, Israel didn't exist as a country or kingdom in like a 1000 years. The last King of Israel died, when? After the Romans, then time under Egypt, Ottoman, etc. simply put there was no Israel. There were people but no nation. It was just land under the governance of others without even its own government. Romans allowed Israel to maintain some level of self-governance under Roman oversight. However, in the centuries after that Jesus figure's time, Israel kingdom was completely crushed and eradicated and then occupied by others since with many Jews in exile for 1000 years. Many settled in parts of Europe. Then the arrogant U.S. and UK in their haughty attitude insensitively imposed the creation of Israel. Yes, I see the issues the Palestinians and others in the immediate region had. Many in this region were Islamic and non-Islamic "Arabic" (non-Jews) people (not sure of all the terms for the various groups and their identities so bear with me, I don't mean any insult) people. While there were some Jews that still maintained their beliefs, they were a minority. Then a great multitude of Jews from Europe and elsewhere began migrating to the newly formed Israel. Granted, the number of Jews from abroad were larger in numbers than any time in history of Israel kingdom. However, these Jews are largely mixed with non-Jews like Europeans. There is an unforgiven issue by pretty much the whole Palestinean people and to an extent the people of Jordan by the very imposed creation of Israel. This hatred was seen beyond that immediate area of the middle east but many Islamic people of the middle east. This is why we became targets by Islamic terrorist groups since the 1960s. It is the Judeo-Christian cabal they called infidels that spearheaded the creation of Israel. So there is this dynamic and hatred on that side. Then of course the multitude of promises and claims. Now, after 50+ years, both sides been doing wrong to each other that there isn't even clean hands or innocence on the factions. They are bad to each other and bad neighbors. They shouldn't be neighbors anymore and both sides should leave. Leaving the land back to the divine Lord. Right now, it's a complete mess. The last people to be involved in settling the dispute is Americans. Once American hostages and Americans are returned back to U.S. (including those who died), U.S. should just butt out and leave this dispute to resolve itself or addressed by UN. This is part of what UN was established for, in the first place.
I also fundamentally disagree with the title and sentiment of this thread... Israeli's are NOT committing genocide against Palestinians. They are not out to ERADICATE the Palestinian people. That is ridiculous. Read my comment above about chemotherapy and cancer. Shame on the OP. This is a war, and as a Jew, I can tell you that we all have to pick sides and in this case, 99% of Jews are firmly united in support of Israel. We can and will utilize our influence as a successful nation to fight back against messages like this. Careful of the consequences.
That's cool, your logic and language is extremely similar to that of other genocides where "Chemotherapy is used to cure the Cancer". You may know they have targeted chemo also these days, but thats beside the point.
Is that the excuse Israelis use to settle into the West Bank as well? Are the harmless civilians there also akin to "Cancer" to them that they need to cleanse the land of?
The latest info shows about 14,000 Palestinians killed (thus far) for 1,200 Israelis. That is around 12 Brown/Arab lives for one Israeli person. So yeah it is pretty clear who is trying to eradicate the other group.
As for consequences, bring it on. And as a Athiest/agnostic, I have picked a side and its NOT yours, Bulgar. I also laud various countries like South Africa kicking out your Israeli diplomats. I wish other had the same spine.
and I guess that's why we have a war. You will be on your side and I will be on mine. Bring it on.
Here's my diplomatic solution, both sides solve there disputes diplomatically in peaceful and civil manner or we kick both sides out. Knock off this inheritance feud that is what both sides deep down is about claims and hatred over disputes of inheritance since fucking Abraham. They are your fucking cousins. They are part of his descendants at least in part where there lineage traces back to. I'm pretty certain this land gift is so you ultimately share the gift showing compassion and love. Jess were in large part responsible for that great flood and nearly being smited by God. Right? Stop fucking up and share the sandbox peacefully because really, it doesn't belong to you. The divine Lord of all created the Earth and everything on Earth and the cosmos. You belong to God. They belong to God. Learn to live together or lose it. Remember the exiles. You lost it like what was it... over 1000 years ago. If you want U.S. and the UK, we should kick both the whole lot out and send them to exile... a great Exodus. Start looking at the issue from that perspective. Behave and live respectfully to each other, celebrate your religious beliefs and heritage in peace. Otherwise, exodus to all of you for the next 1,000 to 10,000 years. How's that for diplomacy.
Just because Israel is more effective at mass killing (given they been weaponized, a good part from the U.S. in the beginning and intermittently over the decades), it doesn't mean there isn't bad actors on the Palestinian side engaged in wrong doing. I see both sides are bad. However, U.S. is NOT the face to be spearheading the peace. We're tainted, and our weapon technology has been employed in this atrocity. So it really should be UN and other leading nations other than U.S. and UK because we're part of the guilt behind this. If we didn't create Israel, this would not have occurred. We planted this unholy seed of disruption. It is precisely the reason why I think U.S. should become more insular and get out of the affairs of other countries and take care of itself. Certain, not THE face. We should not be involved except as members of the UN. We should take a more muted or quiet role and not be leading any spearheaded effort on this and future matters in the middle east. It is just wasting our tax dollars getting militarily involved in these matters. Even diplomatically, we should be "star actors" in the diplomacy of these issues. Our country has neglected itself and its own people for too long.
Im going to post this thread on Linkedin. Let's see how long it takes before #DefundArchinect becomes effective.
Yeah, that is the only recourse you have - threatening to quiet people using popular elitist sentiment that is no longer valid in 2023. Same reason why most of Hollywood and Architectural literati are mum.
Extremely sad that you dont have the cojones to debate this out and threaten to cancel a whole forum. Yuck.
You are the one propagating support for terrorists and falsely accusing Israelis of committing Genocide. Yuck!
No one is propagating terrorists. Didnt you just validate the Israeli genocide by saying that like in Chemo, innocent people have to die for the sake of destroying a few cancer cells ? Or are we going back on that.
Indeed, most of the world, except for Israel, the US and UK are on one side (saying that your peeps are committing genocide). But yeah carry on your narrative, it is not easy to keep fooling people for ever and ever.
No - I stand by my cancer comment. Eliminate Hamas at all costs. The world, region, and Palestinian People will be better for it.
And like Chemo, destroy a whole lot of innocent lives with it yeah? Just clarifying cuz that is the literal definition of Genocide.
Nope. Again, genocide is the intent to completely eradicate an entire group of people. That is neither the case or intent here. Unless you admit that all palestinians are hamas... something I and 99% of Jews and Israelis disagree with.
So how many of the 14k civilians killed were Hamas, do you care to expound? pretty certain that the 5k babies were not, for sure.
Neither are any of your good liver cells during chemo. Sad, but necessary if Hamas is cowardly enough to hide behind babies and children.
No, you send troops and take surgical military operations that are much more precise than missiles and their explosives. You can precision shoot a Hamas in the head between the eyes with sniper training. The missile blows up the building or portion of it killing everyone in the blast radius. A gun would be more precise. IDF should be adequately trained to do that just fine to go after Hamas (combatants). Babies are not. That's a war crime. Especially in the whole context of the situation in mind. It isn't Vietnam where a child is strapped with a bomb and sent towards American troops and then detonated (often remote detonated) when American troops gets close. In that case, you would shoot the child with the bomb, unfortunately because there is no saving them unless you can stop the combatant with the remote detonator. It depends on all factors and not an easy decision to live with. On the other hand, what this appears to be happening in the area there is particularly atrocious.
So... after a few days, we get a few handfuls of reasonable points of view, one reasonably terse Balkins comment, and the ramblings of a disconnected fuck. Not bad, all things considered.
BulgarBlogger wrote
"Im going to post this thread on Linkedin. Let's see how long it takes before #DefundArchinect becomes effective. "
Go ahead. It's a great way to dox yourself you brave boy.
or maybe I'll have some of my Jewish and Israeli friends do it for me. Already reached out. Sayonara you terrorist lovers! Don't poke the bear. Many are in real estate. Great way to piss off clients, Chad.
Go ahead. I've made it quite clear that I don't like what either side is doing or has done. Both need to stop the killing.
How about this BulgarBlogger - tell us your real name and where you work. I'd think you'd be proud to publicly share your views on this subject. I know I am am.
Chad... don't push the clueless wanker. He might go ahead and do it, only to find out how wrong and ignorant his views are.
BulgarBlogger can do what he wants. I really don't care.
I do think he should publicly support his views with his real name.
N.S., *shoosh* that's denying him an educational opportunity.
If he supports his views that much, let him. He should with his own name and stand behind it. I don't hate Jews. I don't hate Palestineans.
I think the situation is, they both are doing wrong to each other and other are not really acting in good faith. Israel is excessively killing Palestinians and I don't support that act. I also don't support the manner in how Palestinians groups done some of what they done. I think the U.S. should, as soon as we get our Americans back (living and those that died), we should take a backseat with the international community with UN to intervene in diplomatic resolve to put an end to this.
We should let the international community arbitrate and resolve the issues and work to bring peace back while we stand off to the sidelines and with NATO and U.S. resources in place to protect the neighboring countries from any incidental fallout of the war.
If the war happens and can't be peaceably resolved, then as an international community (not just a U.S. intervention but a large scale international community), we take steps to put an end to any tyranny on either or both sides. However, this lead should not be U.S. or UK. It should be EU and other members of the international community (UN).
99% of the Germans were on the side of the Notsis, so you're in good company.
Almost no one has written anything to get them doxxed, with the exception being you. No one needs to apologize for definitions defined by international bodies, and laws, written specifically to address what Nazis did. Now, you may find it "objectionable" but I for one don't care what you think. Everyone in the world could condemn what the terrorist group Hamas did, and zionists like you, Reverend John Agee, and the fascist Netanyahoo, would still justify your genocide of innocent Palestinians.
I am glad BulshitBlogger said what they did. It is how a lot of cancel culture operates these days, and whom it favors. With Ukraine it was fashionable to rally against Russia, but with Israel it is totally inconvenient.
Perhaps the reason why a lot of Hollywood "Activists" are completely silent. Not that our words count for much, but there's not a single Architect (with a capital A) that has even denounced any of this carnage.
Can I? (under the flags of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [including Greenland]) I, Richard Balkins, Architect (in the countries of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark [including Greenland]), DENOUNCE this carnage and hostile conflict by Israel and Palestinian groups that are harming, injuring, and killing innocent non-combatants and the atrocities that have been occurring including hostage-taking of non-combatants. I implore both sides to discontinue the hostility and carnage on innocent non-combatants. I implore compassion and care and genuine resolve for peace.
[Disclaimer: No claim to Architect license or offering of architectural services in countries and states/provinces where licensure is required]
Have you been to Scandinavia Rick? sorry … do you have a passport ?
Passports and visas are obvious stuff I would have to go on-site for on-site work. I don't have to be in Scandinavia to prepare do most of the work of actually preparing the technical submissions .
You dont need a visa to go to those countries as an American citizen Rick... why dont you call your self an Astronaut ?
Ok, visit vs work, okay. There is a point where a visa isn't needed so yes. I was too busy at the moment for a more detailed answer on that but I agree. So it depends how long I am there over a time period. Going there to visit that comes at a cost factor that needs to be accounted for in billing and in contract. You don't play cheap ass if you have to make several plane flight trips there. It also makes sense to use today's technology.
Bottom line is, unless I go there or have a reason to go there, I can do the work here.
Norman
Unless we're redefining the word genocide, I can't help but feel this position is coming from a place of bad faith. Its fairly simple to understand that if Israel wanted to perpetuate genocide of the Palestinians, it could do that easily, tomorrow.
I realize these are the tactics of an ideology that replaces basic ideas of good and evil and reduces all of the worlds conflicts with a simplistic and intellectually lazy framework: the powerful (bad), and the powerless (good). Once framed this way, the "correct" position becomes obvious: Israel, racist oppressors. Palestinians: noble victims. Intentions be damned. Inconvenient truths be ignored. We will bend all language and facts to fit.
Let me mental gymnastics proceed!
The Israeli military and Hamas are both bad. The Israeli and Pakistani people are both good.
Chad: Think you meant Palestinians there bud, not Pakistani.
Shakey: Please enlighten me as to what the "intentions" of the state of Israel are... from where I stand, Israel has been forcibly removing Palestinians from their land, eradicating them with missiles and guns, and even knifing them in the streets, for over 70 years.
Why are you the one to define "genocide" when there has been nearly 70 years of a general understanding, and accepted definition of the term? "Ongoing Genocide" is what this is, ethnic cleansing, it's already exceeded the toll of The Nakba.
Jovan - sorry about that. I don't know why I wrote Pakistani instead of Palestinian. I think I have too much NFPA 285 on my mind . . . . :(
"Its fairly simple to understand that if Israel wanted to perpetuate genocide of the Palestinians, it could do that easily, tomorrow."
Wrong, they ARE doing it, today. The only reason they did not do it all these years is that a. It would seem too much like the oppressed becoming the oppressor and b. A slow death furthers their military ambitions, as well as warmongers like the US. With the combo of Netanyahu and Genocide Joe, they are proceeding with what they set out 75 years ago.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/29/us/henry-kissinger-dead.html
Speaking of Genocidal Pieces of Shit
There are a few more that are still alive -- wish he had taken them with him.
Well, here's to hoping the burial plot is public, and the ceremony is filled with "friends" to the cause.
I'm just wondering if the new seasons of Futurama will now how Kissenger's head in a jar.
Whoops! They already did it!
what do you suppose should happen to the people of Israel if the state of Israel were not to exist? I understand the argument from the Palestinian perspective, and the argument that Israel’s tactics to eliminate hamas are not surgical and seemingly careless, but it’s ridiculous and naive to think that Israel’s can live in harmony with ultra conservative Islamic states on all sides without being persecuted and falling victim to genocide. They are literally saying what they would do to the Jews, and woke Americans are like “nah they don’t mean it” Make no mistake, to support the eradication of Israel is tantamount to supporting the eradication of the Jews and homosexuals and other minorities of the region. You people seem to forget that the Jews are the minority in the region by a long shot. This in no way is to justify the killing of Palestinian civilians. That is unequivocally wrong. I think disagreeing with both sides in one way or another is the only rational and ethical stance. This false dichotomy that we must choose a side is foolish and destructive. I choose the side of good humans regardless of nationality. I choose to criticize both regimes for their share of wrongdoing.
No one says that Israel should not exist. But they should do so in peace and solidarity with their neighbors (the palestinians). There's no need for settler violence and appropriation of lands, something that the Isralies are doing all the time.
The consistent gaslighting is enraging. As SOD says, and many of my close Jewish friends say, Israel has no right to continually expand into lands set aside for Palestine. Conflating Israeli colonialism with anti-Semitism may be convenient and make you feel justified but it is in no way accurate.
Many people are saying that Israel should not exist. You may not be saying that, but that’s the dominant belief in the region, and literally in the constitution of Hamas. That is one reality - a Nazi like Frankenstein threat. The other reality is that Isreal is / has treated the Palestinians terribly for decades. One thing doesn’t justify the other. I don’t have to side with the bloods or the crips regardless of who is doing worse things. I can simply denounce gang violence and denounce both sides for their specific roles in the situation. We have too many folks denying reality and deluding themselves to support one side or the other side. Overall, my allegiance is to innocent people regardless of their nationality, and to the western liberal values that actually allow for a multi-cultural state of peace - like we have relatively achieved in the US and some of Europe.
Frankenstein being Hamas that is.
Frankenstein was the scientist. So you might be on to something.
Frankenstein = Western Colonialism
Monster = Israel
It's been said by many others; Israel can either be a Jewish state, or a Democracy, it can't be both. If it wants to be a like their neighbors, state that you're a theocratic ethnostate. The only solution is a one state, pluralistic democracy.
SOD, There shouldn't be an Israel or any country in that area. It should be like Antarctica. There are a lot of reasons for it.
b3tadine[sutures], Western colonialism is not the only form of colonialism. Have you ever looked at a map of the Arab world? Who would you rather be colonized by?
Really? That's hill you want to die on? My government is supporting this genocide, my imperialist war machine. Let's focus, ok?
The waters become muddy when we apply certain standards to some groups and not to others. I can without hesitation criticize the US foreign policy and Israel’s policies past and present. Many on the left however have a difficult time criticizing the PLO, Hamas, Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Iran. Last I checked Egypt shares a border with Gaza too. No peace and progress in the region can ever happen until we hold all peoples and cultures to the same standards. That of course includes holding the Israelis and US responsible for killings of civilians. I would agree that Israel is doing something akin to a “oops I did genocide”. They are using Hamas as a justification to pummel Gaza and collectively punish the people. I have no problem at all criticizing that. Many folks however have this warped notion that de-colonization is a justification for violence. Being that colonization and imperialism has been a continuous and universal force of human civilizations nearly any violence can be justified if we do enough mental gymnastics. This is a very dangerous path to go down.
But yes, western liberals
values
But yes, western liberals
values are absent in most of the Arab world. I don’t think we need to spread those values like some evangelicals, but we also need to recognize that the average Israeli probably doesn’t want to integrate their nation with a nation that doesn’t share these values. Can you understand that perspective?
Frankroidlite wrote:
::snip:: "Many on the left however have a difficult time criticizing the PLO, Hamas, Egypt, Libya, Jordan, Iran." ::snip::
I criticize all of those groups and I'm an evil socialist Liberal.
Frank, that is squarely an Israeli problem. There are many multi-dimensional and multivalent cultures in the world. If Israel wants to impose their values on their neighbors, it is the definition of OPPRESSION.
Oh, and Frank, you should be ashamed of being a Zionist sympathizer at this moment. I know I would be, even if I was a liberal Israeli. I can only hope that History will not be on your side.
You should be ashamed to support any group that actively target non combatants and want to kill people only because they're of deferent religion.
I'm firmly on the side with anyone rebelling against a fascist regime. Be they Nat Turner, John Brown, IRA, ANC, Indigenous People, or groups fighting for the liberation of the Palestinian people. All the groups I've cited have a shared struggle, and that is undeniable. All The Power To All The People.
b3tadine[sutures], there are other ways to fight oppression. I prefer the way of Ghandi, MLK, and Mandela. Historically those tactics have been more productive than any violent uprising. Furthermore, any man who supports the systematic rape of women and slaughter of children in their beds is not a man worthy of my time. I applaud Chad and others for having the courage to criticize both sides for their evils and to try to understand multiple perspectives. Chad, by “left” I’m referring to the new left that seems to view everything in terms of oppressor and oppressed. The world is far more complicated than that, and the Jews have a deep history of being oppressed and are surrounded by people who want to kill them. I can’t not sympathize with the anxiety that must create. Imagine if all of your neighbors wanted to kill you because you are whatever you are. That would certainly compel me to fortify my home. AGAIN - none of that justifies the way Israel is handling this war. I am not supporting it. I understand the root of the anger from both sides. I don’t understand the targeting of civilians from both sides. All I have to say on the topic.
For the record b3tadine[sutures] I’m not saying that you do support Hamas. I don’t know what you support. I’m speaking generally to the folks who are literally saying that Hamas is justified in their actions.
Mandela is an interesting choice. He was in prison for 27 years, openly advocated for uprising, was considered a terrorist but the western powers, and in America, until 2008.
Palestinians, in 2018, in the March of The Return, peacefully protested at the wall of their open air prison, and were gunned down.
MLK, wasn't completely on board with passivism, in fact without Malcolm, he wouldn't have achieved what he did, and people still were murdered.
Gandhi, was the only one you mentioned that lived his values, but even then, people were needlessly murdered, and he was dealing with dying empire.
Palestinians have no advocate. No western power, when they should have our backing.
Mandela, go look for yourself, had openly stated that Palestine, and her people, were justified in their actions.
And again, Nat Turner, John Brown and the Abolitionists were right, and no one, not one person who is American would ever say their revolt was wrong.
Yes, Gandhi was probably the most non-violent of them all, but yes he was dealing with the dying british empire who were already weakened by WW2. No the case with Israel, which grows stronger and stronger with ardent support from the US (i.e. my tax money used to kill babies)
I’m not against violence per se. I’m unequivocally against violence perpetrated towards civilians. That said, Israel/US should have instead assassinated all of the leadership of Hamas and the Iranians who sent orders. As a bonus, they should have destroyed Iran’s oil infrastructure to deliver a financial blow. Then surgically kill the foot-soldiers in Gaza. Then US should rebuild Gaza’s infrastructure that Hamas stole from them. Once that’s done, some sort of one or two state solution should be brokered with the US leadership. If Israel doesn’t comply, the tax payer gravy train stops. As far as I’m concerned, the US ought to be calling shots if we are writing checks. Some terms and conditions to the on going aid.
No. To all of that.
What is your solution?
...
My solution? America should stop being an imperialist, genocidal power it has become. It's not in my interest, or the world's for that matter, to continue with undermining the self determination of other countries, simply because they don't support the current hegemonic structures. The reason Iran, a very modern culture, filled with beautiful and intelligent people, don't support America is because we undermined their sovereignty. Stop. FULL STOP.
I agree with that, but we don’t have the benefit of time travel, so now that the Frankenstein is on the loose what do we do?
You do seem to believe in time travel. I'm dead set against bombing people, assassination as a tool for diplomacy, a lesson, we should've learned by now.
Diplomacy? really? With people who order rape as a tool of war? Hamas needs to be eradicated from the face of the earth. They are evil. Those who ordered the terror attacks are evil. As bad as the Nazis. I have no problem whatsoever with their assassination. Remove them in a surgical way and then the civilians of Gaza can have a chance of a decent future.
They're rebellion against an unjust occupation. If you read any of the OP, or anything else online, you'd already know that. But since you are so concerned with rape, I'm sure you'll decry the tool had been used against uncharged Palestinian hostages, by the IOF.
I guess I’m old enough to have escaped the indoctrination. You are structuring your arguments on a wobbly neo-Marxist footing . That footing is fundamentally wrong and unstable. You are reducing humans to members of groups, and you are reducing all conflicts to an oppressor vs oppressed binary. In reality things are far more complex. Who is the oppressed when a mob of grown armed men break into a home rape a woman and slaughter the children in their beds in a serial killer like fervor? At that moment in time, any reasonable person would conclude that the terrorists become oppressive to the family being slaughtered. During 9-11 this was clear to everyone. Since then, something insidious took over the minds of the younger generation. The breakdown of dedication to western liberal values where the individual is the focus has led many to an inability to maintain a consistent moral conscience. Rape is bad is not controversial. To have a significant number of Americans question if rape, terror attacks, and child murder is a okay in some dynamics is very troubling. Humans are individuals first and foremost, then members of communities, then citizens of a state. A civilian is not directly responsible for the actions of their governments, and therefore is not a legitimate military target. This seems almost too obvious to even say, but
apparently it’s not anymore.
"A civilian is not directly responsible for the actions of their governments, and therefore is not a legitimate military target. This seems almost too obvious to even say, but apparently it’s not anymore."
Am I incorrect to see the irony in this sentence, because it does seem to be lost on you altogether. Over 14,000 civilians have been murdered in 8 weeks, by the occupying force. 14000.
It also goes without saying, although it needs to be for some of us, the occupied have l few rules regulating their behavior, whereas the occupiers have many rules.
Occupation Law prohibits an occupying power from initiating armed force against its occupied territory. By mere virtue of the existence of military occupation, an armed attack, including one consistent with the UN Charter, has already occurred and been concluded. Therefore the right of self-defense in international law is, by definition since 1967, not available to Israel with respect to its dealings with real or perceived threats emanating from the West Bank and Gaza Strip population. To achieve its security goals, Israel can resort to no more than the police powers, or the exceptional use of militarized force, vested in it by IHL. This is not to say that Israel cannot defend itself—but those defensive measures can neither take the form of warfare nor be justified as self-defense in international law.
Is the above written by a neo-marxist organization?
This goes both ways. Israel’s careless bombardment of Gaza is also wrong. I do not believe that Israel is capable of governing in the region anymore. I believe that the entire region of Israel-Gaza-west bank should be managed by some sort of coalition government including the US, EU, and the more moderate surrounding Arab States. Rebuild Gaza and the area into something beautiful and meaningful. Let the area serve as a sort of common interest project for these states. The antidote of destruction is not truce or peace - its creation.
Who is the oppressed when slaves revolt and kill their oppressor? Who is the oppressed when indigenous peoples revolt and kill settlers? Who is oppressed when prisoners in camps revolt and kill their captors?
If slaves revolt and kill their slave masters then they would be justified. If they kill the slave master’s children and rape the slave masters wife that would be unjustifiable. If some lunatic kidnapped me it would be justified for me to kill him. If I then turned the gun on his unwitting family out of pure hatred and bloodlust it would not be justified. This is not difficult to understand. Hamas didn’t attack military targets. They attacked civilians. They didn’t attack civilians by accident or in a collateral way. They targeted them in a premeditated way by orders coming from their leaders.
Let’s also not pretend that Hamas cares about Gaza civilians. The likely intent of the attack was to disrupt the deal between SA and Israel
Please @b3tadine stop conflating Hama's actions with anything but a jihadist holy war. It's literally in their charter. This resistance talk is nonsense.
Frank the fact that your Bibi (more like Bobo) ignored the intelligence warnings of the "most sophisticated intelligence in the world" likely indicates that they wanted this war to happen, so they could appropriate most of Gaza and drill their holy oil. Also, Shakey, this "jihadist war" is a result of Israel stealing all of their lands directed by the UK and other western countries. So , yes it is indeed a resistance.
Shakey, you're going to have to do better than that, provide receipts.
I've seen stupid people who talk like the situation is a football game or something, but this guy Frank tops them all. Don't bother with this creature. He is uneducated on the subject and a stupid mouthpiece. You won't change his limited mind if there's one. Anybody who says my side is a better 'colonialist' should be thrown out of the room and asked to repeat the class.
The narrative that the west invented imperialism is laughably ahistorical. The Arabs took over - through conquest- all of North Africa and the entire region. Should the “indigenous” rebel against them? How far back do we go? Maybe we just all commit suicide and return lands to the Neanderthals and then they can return lands to the bonobos?
Nice, you are racist as well as stupid. Those two traits usually go hand in hand as you have illustrated.
You obviously didn’t read anything that I wrote. This is no time for lazily skimming.
Nothing that I wrote is at all racist in any way shape or form.
But just so frustrating how dumb some folks are to think that Palestinian is a race. Virtually all people from the Mediterranean region share very similar genetics - including southern Europeans. Most of the world doesn’t view race in the ridiculously simplified American way. Many, but not all Israelis are lighter because they are Jews that came from northern regions many decades ago.
Wild, just wild. Zionists have been arguing the exact opposite. They claim a right to Palestine that goes back 2000 years. And virtually everyone that has more than one braincell has been arguing, not 2000 years, not 500 years, not even 200 years - albeit some, including myself have been arguing this issue is measurably 100 years old - 75 years in the making, in our parents lifetime, and it's only getting worse. So how about not getting derailed with bullshit, and let's focus on the real issue, not some horseshit you just make up?
I disagree completely with the idea of “ancestral lands” or “indigenous” peoples. There is no such thing. The Jews should have been relocated to the US and other allied states post war. Yes, the initial act of creating Israel in Palestine was a mistake rooted in a bad narrative - the same bad narrative that is now being used to argue for the removal of Israel by the other side.
No one is arguing - at least convincingly - arguing for "removal" of Israel. What is being argued is for the removal of the apartheid conditions; what currently exists is incompatible with a democracy. See my other comments for more. A One State solution, where a pluralistic democracy is the law of the land. No. More. Ethnonationalist. States.
Blood and soil nationalism, no matter where it exists, is anathema to a free people.
I agree with that in theory. In practice it’s difficult because of the widespread antisemitism in the region. That’s the point I’m trying to make. The opportunity for that is decades gone. The only way that a one state solution could happen without it devolving into civil war would be for authority to lie in the hands of an outside coalition govt. that’s what I was getting at earlier. First and foremost Hamas needs to be eradicated and Irans proxies need to be shown that interference will not work in their favor.
While I’m generally against nation building, this particular situation may require it.
What is our track record of nation building, at the end of gun, record look like?
oy veh! Your forefathers built these ships not too long ago.
you ARE stupid aren’t you?
Not mine, but if you want to talk about slavery, that’s also not a unique feature of the west.
Your post is so foolish. You are trying to impose guilt upon a person living in the 21st century for things that happened before they were born by people who may be from the same continent as their ancestors - whom most likely were poor farmers. But this only applies to Europe. God forbid we apply a consistent logic to the many other empires across history.
You're blathering on like no one knows that, and that knowing that somehow matters. The current hegemonic domination lies in western countries, has been that for over two centuries. It is, coming to an end.
Israel is a tiny dot in the Arab world. The hegemonic domination of that part of the world lies with the Arab states whom gained domination through imperialism and are now largely theocratic and homogeneous (through ethnic cleansing
of their own).
The West created modern Israel. The West supports modern Israel. Christian Evangelicals believe in the second coming, where, in Israel. Stop thinking that there's some kind of pure agency at play; Israel is a theocratic ethnostate.
You seem to value history, with none of the lessons, others here are not interested in litigating the past - centuries past - not because we don't find it valuable to learn from it, but because we know the only thing that can change, is the now.
I bring up history only because of the ahistorical assertions being made.
20% of Israel’s population is Muslim. There are only 20 million Jews in the world.
None of it matters b3tadine. The second coming isn't this world. Israel is anywhere GOD decides. Read Revelations again. The Israel today is not GOD's Israel that is referenced in the second coming. When the second coming happens, it will be by GOD's will not by our hands or our actions. We recreating Israel isn't going to be triggering the second coming. Even then, GOD can decide to rescind that and say, you know, f--- the humans. Who are we to tell God or demand anything of God. God can decide to just like the infamous Q in Star Trek TNG, snap His fingers and we all just no longer exist. Just like that. That is what ALMIGHTY POWER means and can do. What have Christians done other than being among the most genocidal, bloody handed asses the world has ever seen? History of Christianity is well... ugly. Why should he come? Why save a bunch of worthless trash that would attempt to kill him? Humans aren't exactly worthy or thankful of being saved from death by a hypothetical resurrection that has not seen one legitimate scientific proof of resurrection documented, ever. So people kind of look at this as kind of a placibo against the anxieties of life and death but no one really believes that there will be this resurrection and God is more like Santa Claus. A nice story for our kids and child within us. God as religious institutions and religious texts says is a work of fiction. While there may be a divine being, is it likely that being has ever interacted with us if we are really just microbials in that being's body that embodies this universe and whatever beyond. I can think of the true God of creation as a body like a tree so large this universe we live in is just a single cell. We live inside just one cell. The multiple universe in time-space-matter-quantum reality is the composition of cells that makes the GOD's being. We see GOD every day but only a fraction of GOD's body. So do we really believe GOD is having such a personal relationship with humans? Do you have that with the microbial life inside your body and have personal conversations with it? Do you, really? Most of the U.S. thinks Judeo-Christian-Islamic religious beliefs are really mythologies. All fiction that some believe in still but just doesn't actually exist. Kind of like children's belief in Santa Claus. Eventually, they realize there's no Santa Claus. There was a person in history names Saint Nick that was an inspiration for the story that some believe as real until they grow up. Is the God character in the Bible, real? This is why there is a decline in believers. The new 21st century religion is atheism/agnostisim or something of the sort that is not attached to any organized institution of religion. Science doesn't deny that there isn't a "God Being" of some kind. Because, it could be that "God" is the encompassing universe(s). However, the Bible is just a book with a fantastic story and some good moral teachings by individuals. It is possible there was a Jesus figure. There is some historical data to allude to such but of course such records hve deterioriated over time and records of the day were limited in the first place. He may have been a very forward thinking, ahead of his time rabbi. Killed... not too unlike MLK, jr. People who tend to rock the cultural boat tends to get killed by people who fear changing the established way. This doesn't mean these people were GOD. Christians basis their belief on pure faith alone without proof. How can there be? Now, as I questioned God's existence or GOD's relationship with humanity, maybe such a GOD can talk to us but through our mind. Psionically. Maybe. Maybe the one way to communicate to us in a form that can. A voice of a being so massive could be deafening beyond belief. However, psionic communication maybe more effective and gets through the translation and presenting itself in a form comprehensible to humans. An 'avatar' such as the burning bush or communicated as a voice in the mind. Hence, conveying psionic connection. I think that is perhaps the means and method that GOD would use to communicate with us little lifeforms living within him. So my question then may be, what second coming? God never left. We just don't recognize him as God. God is the day and night sky. God is the rock you walk on. God is stars, the planets, etc. It is part of God's living body. You think it is just inanimate and just that. God is connected to every proton, neutron, electron of this universe and every universe. So maybe, that is God. You are part of God but not God itself. You are your own being but God is symbiotically linked to all. So what "second" coming? That is premised on the idea that God left. The second coming isn't a physically second coming. The second coming is about becoming realigned with God and back in relationship with God. Israel is the metaphor of being back in relation with God not about a real place on this earth. A new Eden. Revelations was a metaphor. The 1000 years is symbolic of wholeness as "great battle between good and evil" and "armageddon" is about the great struggle of our life as both saint and sinner. When we die, our soul... our essence joins in union with God and we become closer with God than we are in our disjointed existence. Our material essence that separates us keeps us turning in ourselves as separated. When we die, our consciousness and soul (Vulcan's called katra) joins with God at the core and not as disjoined souls. We begin to exist in God's inner mind in his 'consciousness' and mind. A symbiotic mind/soul meld and transference. It has nothing to do with this rock, here. The writer(s) of Revelations, has to use metaphor, imagery, and recognized places to convey an idea at level they could understand without any frame of reference of science we might have today or even scientific theories and ideas we have conceived in sci-fi that they had zero reference to back then. Pay attention that the second coming is when you die and join into the "kingdom of God". Your armageddon is the final turmoil of life itself. The turmoil everyone faces with death. The emotional struggles of end life before entering new life. That is what it is.
Having said all that, the battle over land and dirt and materialistic things are the stupid stuff that is being wasted on.
Frank, why do you resort to only posting half truths? The pretense of your comment suggests that you think the stat is meaningful in any way. Have you even looked into what it means to be an Arab in Israel?
I don’t have anything to compare to. There are 3 Jews in Egypt, 0 in Jordan, 4 in Syria, 20 in Lebanon, 20 in Libya, 0 in Sudan, 4 in Iraq. At one time there were substantial Jewish populations in these areas. They were all displaced or killed.
antisemitism is a real threat to this tiny ethnic minority in this part of the world. We can’t have the conversation without acknowledging that.
Lol. The typical Zionist ploy - bring antisemitism into the mix to kill the conversation. Shame on you, using genocide to validate genocide.
There was a large pro Israel demonstration planned near my office today but then the bus service hired to bring in the protestors cancelled because we got 10cm of snow and ice. Instead of blaming the weather, they are claiming antisemitism instead. (all school buses were cancelled as a prevention by 6am). People are just fucking dumb.
You obviously didn’t read anything that I wrote. This is no time for lazily skimming.
I did read it, did you not understand my point? Your facts are meaningless, without context, and wholly misses the point. So what if there are roughly 20% Arab citizens, they don't have the same rights as Jewish citizens.
I’m not defending Israel. I’m saying that compared to their neighbors they have a far more tolerant state, and by the numbers of Jews in those surrounding states Israel has a good reason for fortifying its state. We are talking about now. No time machines. Yes I know that Iran was once Paris of the ME and those states were once more tolerant. The region has since been taken over by Islamic theocracy. Did US and Israel play a role in this, wouldn’t doubt it. But NOW is what we have to deal with. Not 1948. Is Israel removed its fortifications tomorrow and the US abandoned them a second holocaust would soon follow. This is the anxiety that they live with. No excuse whatsoever for what they are doing to civilians, but it’s not a one sided issue. Sometimes there are two bad guys and you just have to denounce both
Wrong, there are several accounts wherein the Palestinians and Israelis used to live in peaceful coexistence, their kids playing with each other and so forth. It is Israel's actions that have made them the most hated country in that region and now the world. If Hamas is a terrorist organization, Israel should be branded a terrorist state.
I acknowledged that. We don’t have the benefit of a Time Machine. Things have changed for a number of reasons. Now we have Israel surrounded by antisemitic Islamic theocracies. Whether that’s a result of their own actions or not, the Israeli civilians are faced with that threat, and there is only 1 thing keeping that dam from breaking - the very powerful US military. Israel’s military is powerful compared to Palestine, but the other state’s surrounding Israel could wipe them out in a short time. We have a very difficult multi dimensional situation. Unfortunately the innocent people of both sides are the pawns in this. This is not Avatar where bad white colonizers take over peace loving tree huggers. That’s the mythology that many folks seem to
imagine.
The Abraham Accords, the treaty with Egypt, relations with Jordan. You're working really hard to prove something with little evidence, all the while standing on the edge of a fundamental misreading; the only thing that has changed is apocalyptic evangelical Zionist agenda...it's grown horribly dangerous, and they've found their avatar in Bibi.
Israeli gov. led by a war criminal prime minister, wanted to start the 100+ years of miserable Palestinian history from Oct. 6, balancing the books and assuming the position of the victim. But, it blew up in its face. There is much more empathy and support for the Palestinians. Worldwide public opinion now strongly demands a two-state solution or the end of Apartheid.
I still find it concerning that some people aren't willing at admit that their 'side' has been doing horrible things to non combatants. The amount of mental gymnastics for people to justify their 'side' being 'the good guys' in this cacophony of murder disturbs me. The comments made on this subject makes me question the respect I had for users here and my association with this online community.
Ok, said it before, will say it again - Hamas is bad as well and they are a totalitarian group. That said Israel has proved itself to be much worse and way more brutal, UNDER THE GUISE of a modern, democratic government. To be fair, I would like to not live under either of them.
This is an example of the mental gymnastics . . .
So you prefer the simplistic thought of saying "They are both bad equally, so let them keep going at it"? That's cool but overly reductive
You missed the times when I said both sides need to be stopped. That's the really sad part. Users like yourself don't seem to care about stopping the violence on both sides. You only seem to care that your 'side' is viewed as being justified for the killing of civilians.
Again, reductive thinking. The war needs to stopped on both sides for now and all generations to come. I hope that happens and Israel stops the brutal occupation in favor of coexistence. Happy?
It's a start. I still question the reputation of several users here though. The comments made on this topic and the unrelated actions of several users here are still making me question my involvement in this community.
“To be fair, I would like to not live under either of them.“. What state in the region would a homosexual person do best in? So
You seem to put
Israel’s state and Israel as a western culture into two compartments? Is that. Correct to say? If so, I agree. The state of israel is a terribly oppressive state. I’ve criticized them consistently. However, there is no comparison between how oppressive western culture is to the predominantly Islamic culture of the region.
Strawman
No, it’s not a straw man. It’s the central reason why some strange coalitions have formed, and why so many folks are doing mental gymnastics to justify Hamas. It’s all part of the same bad narrative. A shared desire to see the collapse of the west. A false idea that the west is the prominent force of oppression in the world rather than the prominent force of progress, freedom, and democracy. You have eluded to that a few times on here yourself. The “woke” hate of the west has gone so far that some people are willing to give a pass for terrorism, systematic rape, and child murder. Israel can be criticized while acknowledging all of these other realities that I’ve pointed out.
It is. Your assumptions have zero relevance without lived experience. I will continue to state what I've said in the past; violence against civilians is not acceptable. Given that conscription is mandatory in Israel, it will be hard to gage who is soldier and who isn't. Israel is responsible for a good number of civilian deaths, his many, we won't know as they are destroying evidence.
A fucking Genocidal former cabinet member just croaked, he was responsible for assassination squads, coups, Genocide for a majority of the last quarter of the 20th century, and we're supposed to believe America is a force for good in the world? I can't even say that without laughing.
“Your assumptions have zero relevance without lived experience“. Lived experience is a problematic concept. We should all be able to put ourselves in other peoples shoes. It’s not too hard.
It's not uncommon for people to believe that Islam (or most any religion) is incompatible with queer existence. The ones who do injustice to the queer community are religious leaders, not the religion itself.
To suggest that the West is somehow the proper arbiter of justice and progress is to stand up for centuries of genocide, colonialism, ethnic cleansing, race-based exploitation, and more.
"We should all be able to put ourselves in other peoples shoes".
I will not entertain the idea of empathizing with those committing genocide, statecraft or colonialism.
Personally I'll even go as far as to support Hamas, exactly as I would have supported any other historical resistance group before my time. I do not condemn violence against occupation; or would you have me condemn the Lakota Sioux for their revolt against American settlers in the 1870s? How about the violent rebellion of Haitian slaves in the 1790s? Violence is only called terrorism when it's done by the oppressed.
^ just, wow. amazing post.
this is the reason i've avoided weighing in on this.. elements of the left have gone zealous for the oppression narrative, like jovan above. in this situation you're not the oppressed, you're the oppressor. it's very different for a palestinian under actual duress to support hamas than someone safely behind their computer screen in the u.s. whose tax dollars are supporting the very thing they're "virtuously" standing against. yes, we should be overwhelmingly distraught at what is happening to palestinians at the hands of a completely corrupt israeli state. but advocating for violence over peace for some sense of justice which you think you can even begin to understand thousands of miles away is a bridge too far for me.
Nat Turner
John Brown
TOUSSAINT L’OUVERTURE
i'm not saying violence is never justified - i'm pointing out the contorted position of "supporting hamas" as a u.s. citizen, the irony isn't lost on me. i think advocating for violence in a place most of us here know very little about (and can't ever really, materially know much about) isn't the wisest position.
i also wonder how many of you are willing to do the thing you're advocating for? it's much easier to rattle sabres from behind a computer screen than to actually have stake in the position.
I've been trying to digest Black Jacobins, it's very hard, very hard to hear about the Haitian Revolution. I've been reading Black Skin, White Masks, also difficult to process.
I love Frank's overly liberal, fakely woke retorts - "Oh what about the gays"? As if Israel is the patron savant of LGBTQIA+ causes
square. wrote:
"i'm not saying violence is never justified - i'm pointing out the contorted position of "supporting hamas" as a u.s. citizen, the irony isn't lost on me. i think advocating for violence in a place most of us here know very little about (and can't ever really, materially know much about) isn't the wisest position.
i also wonder how many of you are willing to do the thing you're advocating for? it's much easier to rattle sabres from behind a computer screen than to actually have stake in the position "
I agree.
This is why I've lost respect for several users on this thread and question my association with this forums 'community' in general.
Square: Yes, you're ultimately right that because I live in the USA as a non-Palestinian, my vocal support or lack thereof doesn't materially mean anything. But if you want to go that route, neither does tone-policing.
Could you elaborate on how it's a "contorted position" to be in favor of resistance to Israel? Just because I don't condemn violence, doesn't mean that I actively want people to be killed or whatever. I'm only saying that, as a non-participant in this struggle, I can't deny the right of the oppressed to fight their oppressor, even if by violent means.
EDIT TO ADD: I think it's silly to suggest that random Americans (or westerners in general) are the oppressor. The US government certainly is, but I am not my government. I'm not actively or personally helping to colonize and ethnically cleanse Palestine.
sameolddoctor, what do you think isreal’s response to oct 7 should have been? We both agree that bombing all of Gaza and killing civilians is bad.
i'm not "tone-policing" whatever that means. i'm calling out inconsistencies. here's one: supporting hamas is not equivalent to supporting resistance to israel. further, resistance isn't always violent. and, your denying or not denying the "right of the oppressed" means very little.. what authority are you speaking from to be able to do so? this is too abstract for me: how does one go about actually denying or permitting the rights of others when they aren't directly involved in the conflict?
to add point: i have no doubt hamas and other affiliated groups do not adopt the nuance you are attempting here. there are far to many examples in history to point to.
“I love Frank's overly liberal, fakely woke retorts - "Oh what about the gays"? As if Israel is the patron savant of LGBTQIA+ causes”. I care very much about liberal values and democracy. When a western liberal democracy, or an ally of western liberal democracies fails to practice what they preach I criticize that particular state for not upholding such values. I don’t do a 180 and chant and wave the flag of Islamic theocracies as we are seeing all
over colleges.
To be fair Frank you'd better not wave the flag of the US then . . .
In fact - you'd better go off grid and stop paying your taxes if you really want to do something about it other than just talk. The same goes for the rest of you.
Talk is cheap you keyboard warriors.
Frank, I am no military/political strategist but here are my suggestions:
Damn I wrote a long reponse but messed up, will write later.
sameolddoctor wrote:
"Frank, I am no military/political strategist but here are my suggestions: "
"Damn I wrote a long response but messed up, will write later."
Arrogance and ineptitude are a dangerous combination.
i also wonder how many of you are willing to do the thing you're advocating for?
I'm sorry, but didn't we do this, 200 years ago?
I guess there's no point in saying "wow genocide is bad" unless you're willing to quit your job, fly thousands of miles and go fight Israel with a gun in hand... same energy as "Oh you critique capitalism, yet you own a computer".
"it's very different for a palestinian under actual duress to support hamas than someone safely behind their computer screen in the u.s. whose tax dollars are supporting the very thing they're "virtuously" standing against."
The U.S. is a Republic not a direct democracy. Our day to day use of our tax dollars are not ours to control or decide. It is decided by the people we elect and the people hired and employed. We only get to decide who we elect and their policies. We don't know what their policy will be regarding every situation. Especially, considering the presidential debates recently hasn't been all that informative. It's more like an entertainment show than one about actual informative purpose. Media doesn't care. The U.S. policy isn't even the president's policy. It is the policies of everyone elected and their agendas and what gets agreed upon and what doesn't. The President's agenda applies to the executive branch.
Until it is time for reelection, most elected officials don't base their decision on us. They make whatever decision they want and only considering their re-election when it is getting close to that time for them so they want to secure reelection but after elected and before the mid-point to re-election, they don't care about us.
Politicians don't generally care about us. Every one of us has an opinion. So, why bother. They make decisions on their own or by some colluded party politics things. How my tax dollars are spent is not for me to control.
I can only control what country my citizenship is with. Well, there's processes and it isn't instant but I can choose to be a U.S. citizen or seek citizenship in another country.
The same reality applies every country I could choose to go to.... I don't get to decide how the tax dollars collected are spent on the day to day level. I might be allowed to vote and vote the elected official but my decision is the most broad and macroscopic. I can get to effect broad policies by who I vote for.
WTF Chad, one is not allowed to make honest mistakes? Like you calling Palestinians as PAKISTANI a few days ago? If you dont want to participate in this thread, please do not, its not like you are offering any pearls of wisdom either.
No one is SOD. Nothing you say is going to mean or make any difference. We can yap all we wont, scream, moan, groan, fart, or whatever, it won't do anything. Unless you work in the White House in a ledership role or elected or assistant to an elected official, all your noise here means absolute 0. Why? They aren't reading your post. We are not the audience to have any role to do a damn thing. My next opportunity to do anything is the November 2024 election. That's it. Until then, we're just talking to ourselves. If you want to do something, take action with directing your energy and time to the right target audience.
sameolddoctor wrote:
"WTF Chad, one is not allowed to make honest mistakes? Like you calling Palestinians as PAKISTANI a few days ago? If you dont want to participate in this thread, please do not, its not like you are offering any pearls of wisdom either."
You didn't make any type of mistake.
You admitted you have no knowledge or experience with military tactics, then stated that you had suggestions on how to perform military tactics.
That's just being arrogant and by definition, inept.
Jovan Millet wrote:
"I guess there's no point in saying "wow genocide is bad" unless you're willing to quit your job, fly thousands of miles and go fight Israel with a gun in hand... same energy as "Oh you critique capitalism, yet you own a computer". "
Not at all.
The issue is you're telling people how to think about something because of your great experience and a current understanding in the matter. You've admitted that you don't have ether these things when it comes to this subject though.
I could respect your opinion on the subject if it wasn't for your unwavering arrogance that 'you know better' than anyone else.
Chad, I guess its just easier to be on the fence all the time. Using your real name to be on the fence is no mark of bravery or intellect. Its just ... nothing, even worse than hiding behind a screen name and standing up for something.
Lmao Chad, read through my comments: I never said anyone has to think the way I do. I'm giving my opinions in an open forum. I don't know where you got the idea that I don't have a current understanding of the events?? But yeah, I will look down my nose at people who continue to fence-sit and meekly justify genocide while trying to somehow claim a moral high ground for doing so.
Like if your goal is to do the "well none of us live there so picking sides doesn't help anyone", then like why are you commenting on this thread? Fence-sitting doesn't contribute to any sort of discourse.
Literally (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Rick has more interesting contributions to this thread than you do.
sod, I do have to say this. You are not a military professional with professional experience in making military strategic plans. You are an architect, I think. I could be wrong. Not checking to verify because I don't have the desire to do it. However, most of us can only contribute to this dialogue by being keyboard warriors because if you aren't literally gotten off your ass and drive to District of Columbia and have an in-person conversation with the President of the United States (or go to your equivalent capital and leaders in your country if not in U.S.) then all you do by yapping about it is annoy your fellow forum users who equally are unable to do more than being keyboard warriors on a web forum that absolutely no one in the decision-making leaders regarding these matters in connection with any country is even using at all let alone reading your posts. So we're all barking up our own asses than doing anything for anyone in Israel or Palestine.
jovan, you're shifting my words. i'm calling out the fact that you said "i support hamas."
beta, who's we? certainly wasn't you. are you ready to pick up arms today? i'm not. love all the armchair revolutionaries here, reading books doesn't make you one.
eod my biggest problem is the calls and justification of violence by people who have never been in similar salutations and who i doubt would be willing to do so knowing where we all come from - it's just projecting because there's no tangible way to back up what you're saying. like i said above, i can understand someone living in gaza supporting hamas. but the rest of us should be calling for a ceasefire and supporting peace first and foremost, things we can actually do here through political action.
done with this - hope to see you on the streets.
sameolddoctor wrote
"Chad, I guess its just easier to be on the fence all the time. Using your real name to be on the fence is no mark of bravery or intellect. Its just ... nothing, even worse than hiding behind a screen name and standing up for something."
I'm not on the fence about anything in this conflict.
While I can't support either side, right now Israel is being worse of two evils.
Jovan Millet wrote
"Lmao Chad, read through my comments: I never said anyone has to think the way I do. I'm giving my opinions in an open forum. I don't know where you got the idea that I don't have a current understanding of the events?? But yeah, I will look down my nose at people who continue to fence-sit and meekly justify genocide while trying to somehow claim a moral high ground for doing so.
Like if your goal is to do the "well none of us live there so picking sides doesn't help anyone", then like why are you commenting on this thread? Fence-sitting doesn't contribute to any sort of discourse. Literally (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Rick has more interesting contributions to this thread than you do. "
I'm not on the fence about anything in this conflict.
While I can't support either side, right now Israel is being worse of two evils.
You simply want your side to win the conflict and thus ignore / justify what they're doing.
You talk about having a discourse and making contributions however you've been very clear that if someone doesn't agree with you on this topic they they are a bad person and shouldn't be listened to. Your hierocracy is astounding. I've lost all respect for you as person because of this.
Chad: "You simply want your side to win the conflict and thus ignore / justify what they're doing."
Yes I absolutely would love to see Palestinian people be able to peacefully return to the land that has been taken from them to form a colonial ethno-state.
"if someone doesn't agree with you on this topic they they are a bad person and shouldn't be listened to."
I never said you shouldn't have your opinion Chad. But I do think the "both sides are attempting genocide" is a bit obscene, considering one side has actively erased entire neighborhoods of people, and the other side has killed a few hundred people (yes, I am openly saying that Palestinian liberation groups have indeed killed Israeli people).
Both sides:
Over the last 50 years:
Number of civilian's killed in Gaza: around 16,000
Number of civilians killed in Israel: around 9,000
Just because one side has more funding or has killed more civilians doesn't make them better or worse.
Each side needs to be stopped now. Neither military are justified in what they're doing. Neither military are the 'good' guys.
you have your numbers very wrong though
Not really though.
Over the last 50 years, not the last 15. Oddly enough in the beginning the disparity of the death of civilians per country wasn't as lopsided. Don't misunderstand me, Palestine have always lost more civilians than Israel. It just hasn't been to such an extreme as currently.
That doesn't make one side more 'right' than the other though. It just means that the combat , and the current militaries need to be stopped ASAP.
"There is no life without dialogue. And in most parts of the world, dialogue is today being replaced by controversy, the language of efficiency. [...] ] But what is the mechanism of the controversy? It consists of regarding the enemy as an enemy, simplifying him therefore, and refusing to see him. The one I insult, I no longer know the color of his look. Thanks to controversy, we no longer live in a world of men, but a world of silhouettes. " - - - Albert Camus, The Witness to Liberty (1948, in Conferences and Speeches)
The Middle Ground is Still a Mass Grave - Spectre Journal
A thorough summary of thoughts in this one.
I can't remember if it was 1971 or 1972. I had walked to the side gate where I was stationed where my girlfriend was picking me up.
There was a line of cars off to the side and a guy was walking up to each car with a clipboard. As I got into the car my girlfriend said that guy with the clipboard was collecting signatures in support of Lt. Calley for the My Lai Massacre.
She said she had signed and we could wait for me to sign. I told her no. She asked why and I said because he had murdered those people.
I am sure some of the people on this thread will think I was disloyal and/or a bad soldier. You know who you are.
Those Vietnamese civilians were not murdered by American soldiers. They were murdered by individuals who ceased being American soldiers when they murdered those civilians.
George Floyd was not murdered by a policeman. He was murdered by someone who ceased to be a policeman when he murdered him.
Rules of Engagement and the Constitution are not legal technicalities.
They are what separates soldiers and policemen from murdering thugs.
What do we have here. Well we have some murdering thugs who massacred innocent civilians and some soldiers who turned into murdering thugs in short order.
If you can't see that then you have a problem with recognising objective reality. You know who you are.
Arch2, that's irrelevant here. Here, we're irrelevent because for or against, your voice or opinion means absolutely zero. Why? We are not in any position to do a damn thing. The profession of architecture has zero role. Unless there is a petition taken to Congress or the President of the U.S. or equivalent to any other country, it means absolutely nothing. All you do is make noise. You can't making change. You aren't supporting or fighting the war in Israel/Palestine. There isn't anyone there talking about our wonderful genocide central debate on this forum. No one there even read a single post. That's why we are just barking up our own asses.
That is not exactly true. Debates like this help form a narrative for the upcoming election.
As the most powerful country the President will impact world affairs more than any one else.
Don't you get it? The orange one is openly declaring if elected he will turn this country into a fascist theocracy.
Do you even know about the 2024 project?
Some people on this thread need to get their head out of their ass.
First, I am not voting for the orange turdkey. Who here plans to vote for that treasonous turd? Most of us, probably not. I agree with you that it can help form a narrative for the upcoming election. Given Trump's nature, such a thing wouldn't even be given air time. Trump would waste time whining about his trials and the witch hunt against him by Biden, which he's too undisciplined to bring legitimate arguments to support his claims. His devoted cult followers will walk off a cliff for him because they are dumber than dodo birds. Don't waste your time on morons like that. Talk to people who are willing to change their mind. Granted I won't change my mind about Donald Dump but my opinion of others are more mutable with some level of critical thinking. I lean towards Biden because he currently has the strongest chance of defeating Donald Dung. With other candidates, it might not be. With a your candidate, the Democrats may need to go with Kamila Harris with Biden as VP. As a strategy shift with regards to personalities. It is hard to say. However, this discussion is about Israel v. Palestine. How does our discussion here going to effect that other than its small and microscopic effect on the 2024 election, itself.
As for Project 2025, they discredited themselves by backing Donald 'the John' Turdbucket. If they are really behind Trump and Trumpism/MAGA platform then they can all literally be lined up and executed for TREASON and then go to a special place in he'll and be burned for eternity suffering eternal pain a trillion times more than any human ever experienced. That is how low these people stand in my book. Of course I support law and order and justice for all... how it should be. Ideally, more swiftly than it has been.
You're almost there. Here's the l
Arch2, that is the most liberal milquetoast take I've seen in a while. A cop doesn't conveniently stop being a cop because they murdered someone. Cops and soldiers stay in their positions all the time after they slaughter black and brown people by the dozen. Saying that they "ceased to be [x] when they did [y]" is a very convenient way to deny the systemic violence wielded by the United States against (historically) non-white people.
Also is that lesser evilism I see with the whole orange fascist thing?? Are you suggesting that if we just vote for the blue fascist, we'll all be saved?? Because I guarantee they won't help us either. Here's some facts for you:
Dammit, apparently my longer rant disappeared when I edited (same thing as sameolddoctor above?). If I care enough later to debate about why Democrats are just as bad for BIPOC and other minorities, I'll repost later.
Really?.................................................................... sure about that. Nothing is as bad as the orange turd and the wannabes of that turd, when it comes to U.S. politics.
With regards to post disappearing. Was the long post during edit? If so, don't do it as an edit under a reply or any edit. There is a time limit to submit edits. Best to use the big text box below then click on post comments.
If you are using a smartphone, keep posts short. Most posts I write that are lengthy, I'm using a PC because I have an actual keyboard to use. Phones are a pita.
I had written my long rant (that disappeared) on my computer. i see that Jovan's and beta's long posts are also disappearing...
Did this occur when you were in the editing a reply post because you started with a small reply post?
What you use is to write the posts are irrelevant.
JM I am not going to try and parse the convuluted logic of your assumptions and conclusions.
I am just going to ask a simple question.
Why were civilians targeted instead of the military? I mean that would be the obvious choice.
I am aware of how qualified immunity and profiling create the predicate for systematic racism.
I am also aware of the history of war crimes of this country.
I probably know more about it and have been angry about it a lot longer than you.
A few things about the "targeting civilians" thing.
First is that IDF personnel reports have all but confirmed that many of the Israeli deaths on October 7th were caused directly by IDF shooting. So that muddies the waters as to how many Israelis were actually killed by Hamas.
Second: Hamas rockets aren't supported by an infrastructure that gives them the precision to know where exactly their attacks will land beyond general location and rudimentary aiming (vs the military craft and state infrastructure at Israel's disposal, which allows very precise destruction of Gaza hospitals and apartment buildings).
Third: The narrative of "Israel civilians being targeted by Hamas" is kinda sneaky, considering that 1) Israel has compulsory military service, meaning that a majority of the civilians being "targeted" are actually either active or reserve duty military personnel; and 2) Israel citizens are directly complicit in the mass removal of Palestinians from their literal and tangible homes (plenty of video evidence of Israeli citizens forcibly stealing actual houses from their current Palestinian owners).
Finally, I'd ask you the same: Why is Israel indiscriminately bombing hospitals and leveling whole neighborhoods in Gaza, shooting at and firing rockets at Gazan Palestinians on designated evacuation routes after specifically telling them to use those roads?
Maybe reread what I wrote.
They are commiting war crimes on both sides.
The problem you are having is that you don't have a coherent metric with which make an analysis.
Even under mandatory conscription children are excluded.
During that attack those thugs made individual choices to rape and kill.
Put it this way.
If you want to take over a prison and they are in an open air prison. Why would you murder the warden's secretary and her baby instead of the warden and the head guard?
These thugs made these choices up close and personal. They didn't target on duty IDF personnel which would have been the objective of a true military operation.
On the other side.
Someone murdering another person does not justify murdering the murders family, friends, and neighbors.
This disproportionate response is a war crime.
How can the USA figure out how to stop this insane horror? On one side we have no good will with the Muslim world. On the other side how can we reason with Israel when we did exactly the same thing for exactly the same reason in Iraq. Which resulted in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths.
You and others may not want to believe this but if anyone can figure this out it is Biden.
Anyone who’s lived in a violent environment or has experienced violence first hand wouldn’t be so casual to support it. Jovan sounds like a very coddled and deeply indoctrinated young kid. He has the right to his opinions, but I really hope that he is not around children
with the things that he’s saying.
By the way, There is nothing more racist and ethnocentric than holding ones own culture to a higher moral standard than another.
Arch2: The whole of October 7th is quite muddy, considering the primary reporting on the attack overwhelmingly comes from either IDF sources (who are obviously biased in this situation) or from independent Palestinian & other Arab journalists (many of whom are killed by IDF).
I find it hard to believe sources which come straight from Israel talking about the "horrific barbarism" of Hamas, considering the situation that is, and has been, going for 75 years.
But yes obviously Joe Biden can tackle this issue: the man who is providing $14 billion in military aid to a country that has killed over 20,000 Palestinians (including over 5,000 children). Yes, he and the United States will certainly solve this multi-faceted geopolitical issue of colonialism and ethnic cleansing.
Jovan, yes. This is because Israel is a country. Hamas is sort of a terrorist cell. The missiles are likely older model but still fairly precise guided missiles we gave Israel some time ago. Israel may have eventually acquired or reverse engineered those missiles and made new ones or just acquire more from the same company we contracted to make ours. When they are allies, arms manufacturers can just take the orders and ship them to them as customers. No particular embargo issue.
Israel War practice is based on the Torah and King David as precedence. An enemy is not truly defeated until they literally no longer exist. It isn't technically genocide exactly but an extermination policy that isn't any better. Genocide is killing a race based on race. They are basically the same race. They just different cultures. This is more, simply a kill them all policy.
I spoke my peace.
It shouldn't be intellectually difficult to hold a balanced position, I mean, if you claim to be for liberalism and human rights. You can condemn Israeli occupation and war tactics AND condemn Hamas.
Some people on this thread don't seem to understand what human rights mean. Or maybe they do, but their beliefs in false models of "colonialism" and the "noble victim" have become too connected to their personal identity to abandon. The position I'm referring to here - that if you belong to a nation that is judged to be guilty of certain crimes then all the citizens of that nation immediately lose their human rights, and tying children to their parents and burning them alive is somehow justified as an act of "resistance" rather than what it actually is - complete barbarism.
People are marinating in this shit and the moral rot is literally jaw dropping.
I already have spoke of disdain for the acts of bad actors on both sides.
These evil views are tied to an evil ideology. We all know this. Many still won’t admit it, but they know it.
^all ideologies are equally “evil”.
Frank: Still accusing people of antisemitism for criticizing Israel's very real and continued violence over 75 years are we?
Jovan,
^ finally, a reasonable, non-ideological take. well done shakey.
I was referring to the “woke” ideology that has led many naive young people to excuse the Hamas rapists and butchers. Bad ideologies led to bad conclusions about specific situations. Most Americans saw this coming. They saw it when rioters were excused for looting shops and assaulting citizens a few summers ago. Causal acceptance of violence in the name of this very incorrect and incomplete narrative.
Non Sequitur, that’s a completely ridiculous take. Nazism is equally as evil as liberalism?
Frank - not really. Most ideologies in the world today don't accept change. This is bad when your ideology shapes your entire understanding or misconception of the social and political world.
Frank, don't think you understand what an ideology is.
Frank, liberalism feeds fascism. Liberalism is the socio-economic result of the Western enlightenment, and its tenets directly contribute to the sentiments of nationalism and authoritarianism. To NS's point (or maybe just jumping off it), liberalism as an ideology has been the driving force, if not the progenitor, of colonialism, race-based power dynamics and exploitation, destruction of the environment, and the modern capitalist hellscape we live in today. It ran its course in deposing fuedalism as a governing system in most of society, but its merits have long been overshadowed by its destruction of nearly every kind of life on earth.
jovan it's clear you mean well, but this itself is an ideological take, and one that has gained popularity in the past decade or so especially in certain circles reading certain literature... while there are important and valid points to the critique, it's not a deep reading of liberalism at all, and is very much fashionable right now. but it does explain a lot about your positions above.
i hope there are indeed some things you enjoy in the world, and if you do liberalism probably has something to do with it. it's not all bad!
Seems like you're assuming that I only read about this yesterday, and that my views are entirely beholden to "what's popular in certain circles", which is kinda insulting. My goal in writing my thoughts above were not to give some thorough analytical critique of liberalism as a social ideology.
Yes, I recognize that the modern world provides me with lots of different things I like that are a result of liberal economics. But it feels like you're trying to use that as a point to dismiss the very real criticism that liberalism was born out of (and arguably directly serves) white nationalism.
I’ll bring this to a personal place as I’m currently facing the reality of this life. It’s short. If your position doesn’t make this short life better for individuals then it’s probably wrong, because we experience life as individuals primarily. All the “this group is the oppressed and that group the oppressor” stuff is simply too abstract and broad to matter where it matters. Stop ALL violence in this world unless it’s necessary to preserve innocent lives. It’s only justified when it’s in self defense or the defense of others from some imminent threat. I believe that Hamas is an imminent threat which is why their removal is necessary for both the Israel and Gaza. But indiscriminate bombing is obviously a wrong way to do it. Any other form of violence is in my opinion unjustified.
Overall, I try to decide which solution renders the best results for the most people. There is rarely a perfect solution. Don’t sacrifice the good for the perfect. Generally liberalism has improved life for more people than anything else I’m aware of. We
We (the west) have been far
from perfect, but we have created a fairly decent balance of freedom, safety,
You can’t critique a system like liberalism without having an alternative system in mind that renders better outcomes. Do you have a better system in mind to replace liberalism Jovan?
I most certainly can critique a system which has been largely responsible for the last three centuries of genocide and class and race oppression and exploitation. I personally don't believe that systems of government are in any way a net positive for freedom, and so I won't offer a replacement system. I do think that there are several things that could easily be done away with which would inevitably make peoples' lives better: statecraft, nationalism, capitalism, imperialism, and the insidious and nebulous idea that progress forward is inherently a good thing. I think by attacking and critiquing these systems, the world becomes better for the earth and the life that exists on it.
“for the last three centuries“. God knows It was rainbows and unicorns before that. You are making a common logical error. You assume that removing an imperfect system will default to a more perfect system. The opposite is almost guaranteed. You assume that the current system was imposed - but rather it evolved to be this way. This IS the improved updated version of civilization. Getting rid of windows 10 is not going to get you a quantum computer, it’s going to get you previous inferior versions of windows with even more bugs.
persons are certainly free to critique, but it rings hollow without an alternative vision in mind, or at least some tangible steps towards improving the current system. "doing away with statecraft" doesn't satisfy.
among the left (which i count myself), i find the most hyperbolic critiques and stances come from those who feel alienated from affecting change in their immediate lives, and they often resort to wildly acerbic critiques and unrealistic alternatives as a result of frustration (the result of a failure of our current politics and economics no doubt). maybe this applies above, maybe not. just an observation in my own experience.
You consider it hyperbolic to say that doing away with statecraft, nationalism and imperialism would be a net positive for the world? Out of curiosity, which "left" do you speak for, so I can make sure to avoid it?
I think suggesting the things I would love to see be removed from society is absolutely an alternative vision. But it seems that you're fishing for me to suggest installing another form of government in the area, which I just disagree with. Governing bodies are antithetical to what I see as freedom and equity.
yes, "getting rid of government" is indeed hyperbolic for the actual world we all live in.
You don't know what statecraft is. Getting rid of statecraft =/= removing governments. Just admit you have no idea what you're talking about, but somehow want to toe the civility line of "uhh but both sides are bad, please make peace and be nice to each other". You sound like a hippie.
"I personally don't believe that systems of government are in any way a net positive for freedom, and so I won't offer a replacement system." the hell does this mean then? seems to me you're the one toeing the line.
if you actually read what i said above, i didn't say anything close to "both sides are bad."
It means that I don't think governing bodies represent freedom for the people they represent, and you're not going to get me to advocate for the installation of some governing body that will inevitably quell political struggles through state-enacted violence (AKA the default answer provided by governments).
If you don't know, statecraft is the weaponization of governing agencies to adjust a political climate for the benefit of that government, and often at the detriment of the people who were there to begin with (AKA exactly what the US is doing with its media coverage , speeches, and military aid to Israel).
"if you actually read what i said above, i didn't say anything close to "both sides are bad."
I think that I must have gotten thrown off when further up the thread, you said that it's a reasonable opinion to denounce both sides in equal measure.
"it's very different for a palestinian under actual duress to support hamas than someone safely behind their computer screen in the u.s. whose tax dollars are supporting the very thing they're "virtuously" standing against. yes, we should be overwhelmingly distraught at what is happening to palestinians at the hands of a completely corrupt israeli state. but advocating for violence over peace for some sense of justice which you think you can even begin to understand thousands of miles away is a bridge too far for me."
this is actually what i said. israeli's war-crimes are horrific and completely disproportional. too many innocent palestinians have been killed. i unequivocally support a ceasefire.
call me a hippie, but i don't think it's as unrealistic as many of the things you're saying. and you can ridicule it all you want, but ultimately i hope for peace in the region.
I have a really hard time taking people seriously who offer criticism without alternatives or at least understanding the unintended consequences of removing certain things. If you think that we are living in the most terrible time in history you obviously don’t know very much about history. This is the best it’s ever been, unfortunately.
Has there ever been a society that you view as suitable?
I really don't have any interest in whether or not you take me seriously. I've said my peace. At this point it's derailing into talking points about "which justified ruler would be better for society", and I have no interest in that conversation.
What society past or present reflects the ideals that you are talking about? If it’s never existed, don’t you think that there may be a reason for that?
Human nature is one hell of an obstacle.
The worst part of this whole thread is the whaboutism in the face of a totally disproportionate military response by Israel. The stats that we see with people dead, injured or displaced is in no way proportionate, I hope we can agree on that.
Carry on with this, it will be interesting to see what happens in our lifetimes with the dissolution of this ideological narrative and emergence of the global south.
...and why are you not surprised tho? Given that the US is a big supporter of Israel and that far too many in the US have a first shoot 4 times, ask questions later (if you have time)... it's no wonder the over the top burn everything down response is viewed as adequate.
Yes that is the US modus operandi, but its startling that Canada and most of Western Europe is also heavily involved in whataboutism, cheering on Palestinian deaths.
TBF, there is a significant portion of people standing in front of the Canadian parliament cheering for Israeli deaths. See, we're both fair and balanced.
Wondaful discussions, but nothing has changed or will change. The US just send it 200th (THAT IS TWO HUNDRED) plane chock full of weapons and armament to Israel today.
And yes, that is our tax monies at work.
Not voting for Biden again, never
for the other candidate.
Yup, same here - voted for Hillary in the primaries (very bad decision) and then Biden in the General Elections (even worse decision but had no choice). Not voting for either again. But I think a lot of right wing hawks will vote democrat, as also the hardcore israel supporters. Good luck to all of them.
Well you are aware that not voting for Biden is a vote for the other one who has stated he will declare himself dictator on day one, will build detention camps, prosecute his political opponents, shut down any media that opposes him. That is just for starters. It will be the end democracy, the rule of law, and your life as you know it.
Biden has not done any better, despite claims to do so. Either ways, there is no good presidential candidate for us PoCs. So f em all.
Also, be it Trump or Biden, the state of Israel will be safe and the citizens of the US will not be listened to. So as I said, f em all.
Trump would be the END of the United States. Biden is just politician as normal before Trump which means U.S. on a normal day. At least the way it was before Trump. Biden represents normalcy. Biden represents some sanity. Biden represents a United States that will continue to exist. Stop promoting Trump. Trump represents a new Hitler. He means there will be a BLOODY and DEADLY Revolution where over 100 MILLION WILL DIE! Try to at least apply a little Hippocratic oath to your thinking as long you use the word 'doctor' in your alias. Don't waste our time with nonsense that Trump will only be a dictator for a day. The only way that would happen is if a general puts his/her desert eagle or whatever gun he/she has to Trump's head and pulls the trigger. Once a person is a dictator, they will NEVER relinquish that power voluntarily. No human in past 10 MILLION years has EVER done that. There is reasons why Biden hasn't been pushing to get into the issue.... WE FUCKING DO NOT BELONG THERE. WE NEVER SHOULD HAVE EVER GOT OUR NOSES IN THE MIDDLE EAST FEUD THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
Israel being created by us was a mistake. Period. It was a mistake that has been rife with conflict and that is STILL the issue. The Palestineans will never believe in Israel as a legitimate state and is to be eradicated. Israel's opinion is still just as much about eradicating the Palestineans. They will kill each other until one or both are eradicated. Israel will kill the Palestineans off and the Islam nations around will eradicate Israel from existence. This was going to happen and we knew it before we created that country with the UK. It is only a miracle that it lasted this long but with how much costly intervention by us? So it is time to just let it go the way of the dodo and the U.S. focus on its own needs for a fucking change instead of negligence it has done for SEVEN DECADES straight. It is time to step back and look at what the other western world countries have been doing.
Why is Canada treating its people fairly well? By minding their own business and not getting involved in every damn petty b.s. somewhere in the world. Why are the Nordic countries doing fine? Because they take care of their own people FIRST and foremost. They don't need a military war budget the size of Godzilla when they can use 1/10th that and put the money for its own countries needs. We were doing things right before World War II. Yes, we can have intelligence apparatus across the world but it doesn't mean we need to have military placed all over the world. Now, we have orbital platforms that we can vaporize our enemies from orbit so what the hell are doing getting into war with massive troops deployment and when we can scale that back to more domestic use. This is why I think it is a shame that Israel and Palestineans can't possibly work things out but then they were bad neighbors by design. It was designed to fail. Unless you wish to spend a trillion dollars a year to keep these jackasses from killing each others, what's the damn point.
If they kill each other off, we would be rid of that trouble. Let them kill themselves off and be over instead of wasting our time. This isn't about race. It is about nation state issues. United States is not charted by the Constitution to police the world so why the fuck are our tax dollars going there. Our tax dollars are suppose to be used domestically and build a NATIONAL DEFENSE not to go on the offense unless attacked or we declare war. Until then, we stay out and defend our country.
However, each country is responsible first, for itself. There can be inter-country agreements to mutually defend like in the case of U.S. and Canada. However, we need to defend ourselves but also put resources to serve the needs our own people.
If we had put our finances domestically and not so much in war budget, we would be able to do so much more for Americans. We can have better infrastructure. We can have better health care. We can have better support services for people in need. We can even have public funded affordable housing projects that would easily put an end to our affordable housing crisis in three decades. Including eliminating the homeless problem because we can have places for all of them to go to across the country. So in 50 years, we have a lot of this solved. A very big step from where things are now. Biden doesn't control the budget or where the items in the budget are in. He's President not Congress. There is a lot of issues right now.
What we need is Presidents like Biden that isn't hell bent on totally and utterly fucking the United States and destroying it and converting it to a dictatorship under the rule of Donald Trump and despots like him. Any American that supports this notion should be simply get their asses beat to an inch from death for such stupidity. There's a reason dictatorships have never been employed in the U.S. If you suggest Trump be President, then you need to get your ass kicked... maybe your brain gets sent back to where it is suppose to be instead of being lodged in your anus. Biden is a better choice than the other. There is only two choice in U.S. politics. The Democrat or Republic party.
Our political system is a two party system. Anyone of any other can not even qualify for electoral college votes for the Presidency. Only two parties can get electoral college votes and possibly have a candidate that is elected into office. 95% of voters (other independents... ie. not aligned to any party) are members or two parties. The electoral college system would have to go if we were to have an actual 3+ party system but then we would forego all political party system and vote people on the merits of their agenda not their political affiliation. Make it possible so every person who wants to run would have to simply submit their candidacy application and if they otherwise qualify under the Constitution, then they are candidates to vote from. Let us have a dozen or even three dozen choices. Get rid of the primaries and party system politics.... more or less. So every one who is a candidate becomes available to be on the ballot (unless disqualified) and even be part of the Presidential debate. Whoever gets the most votes wins the election.
Donald Trump already demonstrated his will to attack the United States using his paramilitant followers. January 6, 2021 was close enough. Don't kid yourself, if he is willing to be a dictator on day one, he'll be that every day until he is ousted by an overthrow of him. It will be a real bloody and deadly war. That is not hyperbole. That is what it will take to remove such an asshole in power who has hundreds of thousands of religious followers who practically worship him. Thousands that literally do. This is why we need to protect our country with our votes, first and foremost. If he doesn't get back into office, that would be a key first step.
Donald Trump's trials are of his own doing. HE committed the acts that lead to his indictments. He levied war against the United States by assembling a crowd to attack the Capitol to stop the certification. This attack was always about a violent attack. He didn't even started stalking about peaceful protect until the first wave of the crowd was already underway attacking the Capitol. His whole beginning was about attacking, fighting like hell, and stopping "the steal".
What Trump did prior and on January 6, 2021, that was treason. He committed treason. Insurrection was an overt act that amounts to treason. HE did that. Although not solely by himself but with cohorts... treasonous partners. The conspiracy to overthrow the election, while it begins not quite as treason, built up to the point that he should be charged under ARTICLE III, SECTION 3 of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
He should be tried. The evidence is there to support the very definition of the words and common sense and even much of legal meaning of the words. Actual levying war occured that very day when such mob was assemble to attack. Some were armed but not all were needed to be armed. With mass, you just needed people to overwhelm the Capitol police and security. They even actually succeeded for a short limited time before they retreated because they knew there will soon be reinforcement forces that overcome a long term. Levying war doesn't require a full-on sustained war to occur. Even the attempt with the first battle that ultimately fails is still enough to charge and count as treason.
If they were successful in their full treasonous end, the law would be moot because if they overthrew the country, Trump as a dictator, the Consitution would no longer be the law of the land. At that point, you just have to overthrow and kill Donald Trump and his regime to recover the country. There would be no courts to remove him and his regime. It would be with guns and bullets and missiles, grenades, and anything else. You don't recover a country from under a dictatorship through peaceful talks. It just doesn't happen. Humans aren't evolved enough and if we were so evolved, there wouldn't be dictators and there wouldn't be a need for laws and anything else. Humans just aren't biologically evolved to that point. I doubt humans ever will be.
SOD said Either ways, there is no good presidential candidate for us PoCs. So f em all. There are some that are worse than others. You can't seem to parse the difference between an imperfect friend a f'
mortal enemy. F em all? More like f everyone and everything,
You and everyone who thinks like you are going to make the biggest mistake in history. You are going to destroy this country. By the way was the Nader or Stein administration more to your liking?
"Well you are aware that not voting for Biden is a vote for the other one who has stated he will declare himself dictator on day one, will build detention camps, prosecute his political opponents, shut down any media that opposes him."
Ah yes, the "you better vote for the blue fascist or the red fascist will win" tactic. Me and the homies don't believe that electoralism will solve any of the problems we face, because electoralism is a tool of the state to help us feel that we have any sort of democratic agency. Fact is, Joe Biden has been no better for the rights of trans people, BIPOC or indigenous groups, climate change, or the working class. In all metrics, the policies of his administration have been indistinguishable from the presidents before him.
Don't be a fool.
By the way you do know how to Google right? If you want to know what he has done regarding those issues that is.
Yes, I'm very educated on how Joe Biden has, at best, failed to meaningfully affect positive change, and at worst, has directly harmed various minority and at-risk groups in this country, at the same level if not worse than his predecessors.
Arch2, if Biden has been so great to PoCs, why is that most black males have decided to NOT vote for him? Harris and Biden have been lame ducks at best, and the sponsoring of the Genocide is just bringing all of that to light.
Jovan, Biden is not facist. Learn what the word means and what it refers to. Trump is trying to become the fascist dictator because if he becomes a dictator then his regime would actually be a fascist dictatorship as it was for Hitler and Mussolini. You claim he's sponsoring Israel's genocide. First Israel is a nation-state not the Hamas. The Hamas is essentially a sort of a Palestinean version of the Taliban. A semi-sanctioned terrorist militia. Hamas started the attack. U.S. is against terrorist cells. Since 2001, we declared war on terrorism and namely terrorist groups that attacked the U.S. on 9/11/2001 as well as any sponsors of such groups and groups with terrorist plots against U.S. and its strategic allies throughout the world. Israel is one of those allies. One that is in the middle-east. As for Netanyahu's reactive response to Hamas attacks on Israel, he ordered Israel military to execute attacks on Hamas but in a manner that it is beyond just attacking Hamas. It is simply to exterminate the Palestine once and for all. U.S. doesn't support it but we can't legally go into war against Israel for that. Don't kid yourself, once Israel does it's extermination of the Palestineans, the entirety of he arab nations will enter a unified effort to wipe Israel out of existance. You'll have Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, and even Turkey that will wipe Israel out. Congress won't agree for U.S. to enter war. At least not with the current House. It would be too much congressional resistance until 2025 (if lucky). The Republicans would do whatever to make things difficult for Biden to get things done. Democrats would need to do a better job at working together and getting things done if they regain control of both the House and Senate with powerful control of both houses of Congress. NO FUCKING WESTERN WORLD NATION SUPPORTS ISRAEL'S KILLING OF INNOCENT LIVES. NOT GOING OUT AND SPENDING BILLIONS OR TRILLIONS OF TAX DOLLARS AND MEDDLING IN MIDDLE EAST AFFAIRS DOES NOT MEAN SUPPORTING GENOCIDE. The MAGA shitheads in Congress are PRECISELY the ones holding up any effort to respond. All military responses require government appropriation of money for that purpose. We do not have money for such a campaign. Our efforts are limited. The limited discretionary money allotted had been used in Ukraine, already. It was already a tight budget for that.
There are only two parties that are allowed to get electoral college votes in all 50 states. In several states, they can only issue electoral college votes to candidates of only two parties. Those two parties are Republican and Democrat. It is waste of time to vote for any person for any other party for the office of President. They can't get enough electoral college votes. Some states limits the candidates that a person can vote for to only two political parties. Until that is changed, there is no chance for a third-party candidate of ever entering office because they can't get enough electoral college votes even if they had 80% of the votes of the United States. Strange, isn't it. It is an institution for two political parties that can hold political power in the United States in that office. It is different for Congress. Trump and his MAGA is seeking to become a dictatorial regime putting an end to the United States and the United States Constitution. The power to rule the U.S. and then to rule the world. Biden is the Democrat candidate by statutory default. He's the candidate unless he personally drops from the race. No other democrat has the Democrat support that Biden has. The only other person who might get support is if Biden decides to no run for President but as VP and Harris as President. However, Biden has defeated Trump before and he has the ability to defeat Trump. Once inaugurated, if Biden feels he needs to resign, then Kamala Harris would be President. Biden and Harris at least believes in law and order and the Constitution. Trump and his MAGA does not. He doesn't care about America. He cares about only himself and ONLY himself. Not even his wife or children. That is clearly. He only cares that they don't become his enemy. He'll throw them under the bus or even have them executed if he is a dictator. The definition of dictator implies actually having unilateral power to demand anything and having it done. Dictators are effectively mortal gods allowed to do whatever unless they are removed by the people. It is essential to not vote for Trump or MAGA. Trump needs to be prevented from being President again and be convicted of the crimes he committed and go to prison. His MAGA party needs to be removed from office by not electing them. It is likely some will be in office of Congress but we must keep them from carrying out their plan to end the United States in 2025 and it is essential that MAGA does not hold office of Presidency or adequate path to holding office. This is a deadly serious situation we are in. What it means for Trump in power is a costly revolution / civil war that will cost millions of lives to restore our democracy by removing him and his MAGA. America's future and YOUR future as Americans... your very life Jovan. The MAGA people would have you killed because you represent an abomination in their eyes. This is why YOU need to vote during this election against Trump. The only vote that will count against Trump is a vote for Biden because if we don't secure him through not only popular vote but also by electoral college vote, Trump may get into office and a very deadly war will happen. You could be a casualty of such a war that would result because if he becomes a dictator, only a war will end that regime. I'm serious. This is why we need to put our vote and effort behind Biden at this time. Trump is a greater immediate threat to the United States than Al-Qaeda and ISIS combined... at this time. Those threats are still threats but Trump is a more perilous threat right now. He is the THE ENEMY OF THE UNITED STATES. He is in war against the Constitution, the United States, and the institutions that the Constitution established that would be an opposition to him and his dictatorship regime. This means, he is a direct threat to you the people. You specifically is in direct danger of that regime. He and/or regime will have you killed. This is what Trump represent and the threat he actually is.
You have no clue what you're talking about. Seek help.
Dictator with personal army of ultra-wacky racists with many of whom are also wacky level "ultra conservatives" that have issues with all things LGBTQ+ are crazy motherfuckers who will kill you. This is Trump's followers. Some are so fucking crazy that they actually worship him. Since the establishment of the Democrat and Republican parties, there has NEVER been a single person of any other party President. There is a systemic reason for it. Several states do not recognize any party but those two parties for presidential elections. Those people would never get the electoral college votes. They just can't.
Trump isn't planning to be a dictator for only one day. He plans to be a dictator on day one not just day one. He is lying if he says that. No one seeks to be a dictator just for one day. No one seeks absolute power just for one day. Humans are genetically incapable of such morals that they would have such power and then willfully give it up. The only dictator that has only one day as dictator is a dictator that is killed on the same day. If he becomes dictator, he will have to be killed along with others. It would become a war that will result in many more dying. That is a fact. That is how it occured in EVERY other situation in all of history for removing dictators from power. In the past 10 million years, no dictator ever willfully gave up the power peacefully. Humans are too greedy genetically to be any other way. You are incapable of resisting the temptations and corruption that absolute power will cause once you have it. Once you have it, you will be corrupt. You will be tempted to abuse it. No human ever had so nor will you. Humans have not genetically evolved in 2 MILLION years so there is absolute zero chance you are that evolved.
Donald Trump frankly indicated his intent to be a dictator. The only thing he is lying about it being a dictator for one day unless he expects to be executed within 24 hours. The only ways to remove a dictator is through violent means. That's a fact. If you don't vote for Biden, then your vote then that means more votes that enables Trump to become a dictator. If you want your vote to stop Trump from being President again, then vote for Biden. Only then is there assurance that we can keep Trump from power. Any vote that is not for Biden is simply a wasted vote that allows Trump to become a majority winner enough states to garner the electoral votes. How electoral votes works is, the candidate that wins the election in each state gets the electoral votes of that states. There is an exception to that rule with a few states and only a few. If you think there is enough Democrats to win the election for Biden, the answer is no. It takes people who aren't Democrats to vote vote for Biden. It did in 2020. If you think Trump is not a danger and you have your head up your ass, you might as well be a member of this party.
Congrats with being a member of the HEAD UP ASS Party.
The systemic reasons are established for a two party system because if there were three parties of equal levels with the Democrats and Republicans, there would never be enough electoral college votes for any candidate to win the election. No one would get over have the electoral college votes. Even if one was a winner. It would be a systemic lock. We do not have a system for what to do in that situation. We would need to change the laws at Federal and State level. At such a point, it would need to be changed so whoever has the most electoral vote points wins if we were to keep the electoral college system. Three major parties would result in no simple majority votes and no one gets 50+ of the electoral votes because three popular parties with popular candidates would be too divided. You might get 28%-38% range for each of the three candidate. The electoral counts would likely be similar percentages. There is 538 electoral votes in total. 270 is required to win the Presidency. If you have three closely populr candidates of three parties, the best any may get is in the 165 to 190 range. That's significantly less than 270 to win. We would have a systematic problem.
What would need to be done then when no one can get 270 (over 50% of the electoral college votes? Many states are an all-or-nothing, so whoever gets the most votes wins the electoral votes for the state in most states with some cases for RCV. Do you see the problem? Do you see why there is systemic resistance to having three popular parties? The Electoral College system in the Presidential election then breaks.
I would propose shitcanning the electoral college system or a change where whoever gets the most electoral college votes wins the election and not a simple majority. I don't think we should at this time risk putting this country under an actual dictatorship by enabling Trump to win. Voting third-party is just helping Trump because it makes it easier for Trump to win. The only two candidates with a chance of winning 2024 is Biden and Trump. If you vote for third party, then you are apathetic about the risk a genuine dictatorship would be thinking it won't harm you.
Your sexual orientation makes you a target for the kinds of people that supports Trump. His most fanatical supporters. Those people are racist AND they are anti-LGBTQ+.
Trump and his MAGA as a dictatorial regime would be the end of the United States. Much so, that I would consider seriously about leaving the United States if that were to occur.
Read the book by Charles C. Mann, called 1491 .
The Genocide that started in 1492, pale all Genocides, in comparances.
If "the system" would allow a third-party candidate who actually stood for the people to run and have similar media time to the other main contenders, I'm convinced they would win in a landslide. Which is why they will not be given the opportunity. Bernie Sanders was the closest we have had in recent memory and he should have won the nomination (and presidency); he's not perfect by any means but he got close enough that the powers-that-be won't let that happen again. So we're stuck with a Sophie's choice. Or a protest vote that does nothing except make the voter feel special.
honestly, It's not a sophie's choice, I've heard that lament for too long to be conned. doesn't make me feel any better, it actually makes me more scared for the future of the world. But some things are not negotiable, can't look the other way while this very democrat government is enabling a genocide again. I don't have more power than a vote to change that.
It's called ranked choice voting. I think if every state allowed it then we'd see people elected that actually represented the people.
Ranked-choice voting plus mail-in ballots is how diverse electorates come to be dominated by one-party minority rule. We've seen that happen in every state in the US where it's been implemented.
JLC-1, I have defended Biden since he started campaigning and I think overall he's done a great job, considering what he has had to work with. But there are a few major downsides, unending support for Israel among them, and lack of actual progress on climate change another. He is heavily beholden to the ruling class--he's a corporate Democrat, as is any Democrat who would be a viable contender. I really don't want to vote for him again but if Trump wins, as is likely at this point, things are going to get very, very bad--he has already told us exactly what he intends to do.
So you're right--it's not a true Sophie's choice; there is a clear answer to who we should vote for given the two options we are allowed to choose from.
GW, my state, Maine, was the first to use ranked-choice voting and despite complaints I think it's an elegant and fair system. But if I recall correctly, it's not allowed for federal elections.
WG, as someone in one of the very heavily politicized groups that every candidate has decided to address...things are already bad. Biden's administration has, in fact, seen things get worse for various minority groups in this country, including trans people.
Unless I'm misinterpreting your views, please don't suggest that voting in Biden again over Trump is some noble way to protect these groups from fascistic tyranny. His administration has helped to negotiate the further erosion of trans rights, the further erosion of the climate and indigenous peoples' safety and homes, and has continued the concentration camps at the border for (primarily Mexican) migrants and citizens.
I will not be made to vote between the red fascist who wants me eliminated from public life, and the blue fascist who will quietly sit by while police strip me of my liberties.
gwharton wrote:
"Ranked-choice voting plus mail-in ballots is how diverse electorates come to be dominated by one-party minority rule. We've seen that happen in every state in the US where it's been implemented. "
I've not heard of this. Do you have any studies or articles that demonstrate this? Serious question. Thanks!
Oh boy. Gahbage.
Instead of focusing on racist gerrymandering, the right spends ample about of bandwidth talking about this instead. It's working fine in Minneapolis.
That's why I was asking b3. I know of four states that use Ranked Choice Voting and it seems to be working just fine.
AK, ME & HI have RCV at the state level currently. Others with RCV options at local levels: WA, OR, CA, UT, CO, NM, MN, IL, MI, NY, VT, RI, MD. Are they dominated by one party minority rule?
RCV is outright banned in ID, MT, SD, TN & FL. Are they dominated by one party minority rule?
If there was a viable contender that has the popularity to challenge Trump ( a celebrity with a cult following ), would require someone with some celebrity status. Biden has a celebrity status due to long-term service in Congress and as VP with Obama. If there was a celebrity with perhaps even more clout and popularity than Trump, that candidate would win nomination and compete. Since the 20th century, especially since Ronald Reagan, you need some popularity/celebrity status to become President otherwise no one would vote for you. You have to be a public figure with public / name recognition. If note, you're fucked. Period. An unknown person can't win against Trump. People don't vote for people they don't even know who the fuck they are for the Office of President. So, yes, that is the way it is. So name a candidate right now who is recognized name by 300 MILLION American citizens? Until then, I'm voting for Biden because I will absolutely not vote for Trump.
Jovan, no, I think I'm pretty clearly saying that I'm no longer a fan of Biden, but he's still a far better choice than Trump (or any MAGA conservative) and that the powers that be won't allow us to have other viable options so if your "principles" won't allow you to make a strategic vote, you're doing nothing but making yourself feel good.
GW, I have not seen at all here in Maine your claim that RCGV results in minority rule. In fact here it's the minority--Republicans--who loudly oppose it. They much prefer gerrymandering to get their votes.
I have a problem when you say your principle's only makes you feel good; strategy and "the lesser of two evils" has been the game for too long and taken us to this point, not a good one. For me at least, sponsoring genocide is a stop. It's just one vote, I'm sure he'll get a lot from other people.
WG:
In 2023, Biden's administration proposed a $32bn increase for police spending.
In 2021, Biden's first military action was to airstrike Syria, killing 22 people.
In 2021, Biden's administration tweeted that they would oppose any investigations into the "Palestinian situation", upholding Israeli apartheid in the region.
In 2022, Democratic senators purposely delayed federal same-sex marriage protection votes until after the midterms.
In 2021, the Biden DOJ defended the right of religious schools to descriminate against LGBTQ students.
In 2023, Biden urged congress to pass the KOSA (which has been suggested by the GOP would be useful to silence LGBTQ voices online)
In 2022, Biden backed an anti-abortion lawyer for federal judgeship. And in 1982, he voted to overturn Roe v Wade because women don't have the "sole right" to bodily autonomy.
In 2022, he rallied house Democrats to make rail strikes illegal (in the midst of a huge workers strike).
In 2021, Biden opened the first migrant facility (read: Mexican child prison), after making such a huge fuss about Trump's border wall during his campaign.
I could go on for pages about this, but I think you get my point. So tell me again about how Biden is a "far better choice than Trump"? Better for whom? Seems that voting for Biden will do nothing but make yourself feel good, at the expense of workers, minorities, queer people, and everyone else... just like most every other president and candidate.
Didn't Trump say that he would always support Israel and assist in any way so they could defeat Hamas and Palestine? Seems to me if you're pro Palestine you'd have to be anti Trump.
I am very anti-Trump. I don't know if my comment above somehow made it seem like I support him over Biden. I don't. I simply am tired of pretending that Joe Biden was somehow a better option.
I'm not going to counter with a list of the ways Biden isn't the anti-christ, but wow, you are really digging to pretend those moments define Biden's aptitude & ethical compass for being president
Not sure that posting headlines from between 0-3 years ago counts a whole lot as "digging". These were all reported by various large news organizations, including CNN, Al Jazeera, ABC News, and actual tweets.
again, just because these things happened doesn't make them definitive of Biden's policy positions or intentions
trees:forest
compromise is a thing & is more valuable now then ever before as we kick ourselves in the nutz by tribalizing our civic lives
purity testing is problematic
Yes, vote blue no matter who.
.
As I have said repeatedly, I'm not a fan of Biden, but he has done a lot of good things along with the horrible things. Trump/MAGA has and will do nothing good.
As they say, voting is a chess move, not a love note.
I'm not voting for either (and am confident that Trump will win).
a. I live in CA where my vote does not matter
b. As a PoC I know none of them will do anything at all for me. Trump rattles swords in the country, Biden kills brown people elsewhere.
c. Biden's social policies may be more progressive, but they fall short or being effective.
d. At the risk of sounding "poor", this rampant inflation is not helping the Biden cause either.
I agree to an extent, aside from the bluster and the absolute insane stupidity, can anyone point to the tangible differences between the two? Right now it seems like a zero sum game.
The point of chess is to win, draw is the last resort.
Outside of a traitor, rapist, dictator building detention camps not much why?
Two of those things are being litigated. The last Biden is doing as well. The wall is getting built, speech has been rendered hate, more people in detention, student debt, abortion, kids in cages, unending war, union busting....
The both sides equal BS is ridiculous. At every opportunity to game the system, Trump doubled down on self-serving special interest efforts. He even talked openly about flouting laws and dared anyone to hold him to account. Biden has attempted at every opportunity to restore the rule of law to the federal government & demonstrate that our country can operate as we have been taught that it should work. Whether he's been successful or not is not always in his hands, like any president.
As for a list (neither complete nor exhaustive):
Biden stabilized federal government after an attempted coup; he supported public health agencies; he encouraged the Fed to restore stability instead of urging them to goose cash flow for investors; he returned functional agency credibility to federal institutions (not partisan loyalty pledges to the Prez) along with distancing himself from the functions of the Justice department; removed us from Afghanistan; he didn't strand localities over personal grudges when they had a natural disaster; he has tempered the international disgust with US international policy; he has rallied the EU & Nato to assist UA; he helped to get the first gun regulation bill in forever thru; he passed a bill funding green jobs and infrastructure improvement nationwide that is just starting to find its way into real projects around the country; he has encouraged climate change action.
Go ahead start arguing it now...
"Encouraged" the Fed. If by that you mean, he Encouraged them to crush worker wages, so nothing to manage corporate lust for profits at the expense of the working class, yeah, that's about right.
Please cite what you’re referring to — it honestly sounds like hyperbole at best.
What my reference was to is Biden letting JPowell make prime rate decisions independently to calm inflation vs Trump bellowing/tweeting/entreating the Fed to lower rates so that the economy overspends during his tenure creating an artificial bubble. The result, best I can tell, is a generally cooling inflationary market that is now below 4%, down from up to 9% [monthly rate] at the high.
"In 2021, the Biden DOJ defended the right of religious schools to discriminate against LGBTQ students." Doesn't separation of church and state, a long-standing legal precedence with the courts already shut the door on that. It is nothing the DOJ can do no matter what party is in office. Religious schools are private institution operated by a religious organization like a church. There is too much politics on the issue to stir up crap. This is not a statement of condoning the practice but it is essentially a legal right shielded by the First Amendment and various elements of precedence of prior judicial ruling. So what can they LEGALLY do under the current laws INCLUDING case law and judicial precedence. It is up to the religious institution to change their position to not discriminate the LGBTQ+ community. FYI: Not all churches conducts such acts but there's nothing Biden can do. By the way, the DOJ does not belong to ANY President. It BELONGS to the UNITED STATES. So please stop propagating Fox New, Trumpism. It isn't Biden's DOJ nor was it Trump's. It never belong to either. A President is just an elected public official of the federal government holding an office... that happens to be in charge of administration of the Executive Branch. Just like the governor doesn't own any state agency. They just manage oversight over them. All agencies and departments of the Executive Branch belongs to the United States never a singular person under the United States Constitution.
proto, it's widely acknowledged by less than conservative economists, that the goal of raising interest rates, is an attempt to suppress worker wages.
"Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell plans to address sky-high inflation by hiking interest rates — acknowledging that doing so will suppress wages and worker power. It's a response that will force workers to bear the brunt of the inflation crisis."
Additionally, Biden, despite whatever talking points you're on the side of, has zero impact on The Fed. They act independent of the executive branch, and Powell was a Trump appointee.
Inflation did not have much to do with the money supply, and history will bear this out, but had to do with corporate seeing an opportunity to take advantage of the pandemic by leveraging supply chain issues to grow profits and punish the working class.
Lmao "encouraged" climate action, as if he wasn't also responsible for the largest oil & gas lease sale in US history. "Tempered the international disgust with US international policy". Considering four of the largest players in the "international" community are currently supporting a genocide that's fueled primarily by the US, I couldn't give less of a shit about whether they like us or not. They should be disgusted by themselves as well.
It is amazing how you can read in the absolute worst possible spin when it’s convenient to blast your perceived opponent.
“it's widely acknowledged by less than conservative economists, that the goal of raising interest rates, is an attempt to suppress worker wages.”
No, it is not the goal. But it is an unfortunate side effect that we have to stomach to tamp down inflation. Serious people have to acknowledge that. It is childish to pretend there will be a solution to inflation that doesn’t hurt any wage earner short term. But no one wins if inflation just continues to accelerate. My guess is you have no idea how to curb inflation and not hurt the working class…you just like to paint the people doing the hard work as failures from your fault-free high horse.
Powell stated as much. Do you even read, bro?
Just when I think I have a slight glimmer of understanding the US political world... I read one post here and loose all hopes. It's like mental kryptonite... just can't do it.
We have several parties here who are all very visible and active. 3 Have a fighting chance at the big job (more options at provincial level) but ask me who the leader of any of them and I draw a blank unless they are currently sitting in the fancy unicorn-adorned throne.
And obviously, the US and Israel voted "no to the ceasefire"
You 4 are completely out of your fucking minds.
How many millions of people are going to have to suffer for your willful, absolute, insane stupidity.
I am out of here. I can't suffer fools. That is what you are. Willful, pig headed fools.
No one else is going to deserve what happens but you are.
Just remember when you are on that train headed to a detention camp to be reeducated after you have been deamed undesirable you bought your own ticket.
PS You just defended that lunatic (2 are being litagated)and you are not insane? On second thought you might not have to be reeducated. Maybe you could be a guard.
FINI
Camps? You're boomer us showing. Grow up already.
I need you to imagine a world better than what we have, and then go for that. If you lack the vision to see better choices then why are you here?
.
Arch2, NOT OUR FUCKING COUNTRY to deal with. We don't own the world. We don't have the right to police it no matter how much political bullshit propagated that idea. We do not have any tax dollars to spend on Israel. We used up the limited discretionary funds allowed to be used to respond to such matters with Ukraine, earlier this year. Congress is who you need to harp to. Take it up with the House of Representatives. Until then, shut the fuck up and quit bitching at us who has absolutely no authority to do a fucking thing regarding the issue until November of 2024. All we get to do is vote. Bitching at us now, is hopeless waste of fucking time. None of us here has any clout in Congress or the President. All we are are shitheads sitting in front of a computer screen being assholes to each other. Am I making my point fucking clear enough.
.
I just can't let this level of ignorance stand.
1. What you posted was a half truth. Those pictures are in Gaza not the Southern border of the USA.
2. 2 minutes on Google. 2 minutes on Google.
3. You are being played.
4. You know nothing about me. As a matter of fact I have a proposal for a better world that I have spent 50 years on and I am not going to dox myself and post it because everyone on here is space deaf.
5. You don't understand that politics is the art of compromise.
6. You don't get everything you want if you want to govern effectively.
7. You are out of your depth.
Here is a more complete picture minus the inflammatory images used to confuse the ignorant fools like you. You are being played.
In a statement, White House spokesperson Angelo Fernández Hernández said the administration did not have "determined policy positions" in the congressional negotiations.
"The White House has not signed off on any particular policy proposals or final agreements, and reporting that ascribes determined policy positions to the White House is inaccurate," Fernández
Hernández said. "The President has said he is open to compromise and we look forward to continued conversations with Senate negotiators as we work toward a bipartisan package."The Biden administration's willingness to entertain broad, restrictive changes to U.S. asylum and immigration laws, including measures resembling Trump-era policies, may increase the likelihood of Republicans supporting its foreign aid package. But even if a bipartisan deal is forged in the Senate, it's unclear if the resulting legislation would win approval in the House.House Republicans earlier this year passed a bill known as H.R. 2 that included much stricter asylum and border provisions, including the reinstatement of migrant family detention and the so-called "Remain in Mexico" policy. It also included drastic limits on the humanitarian parole authority, which the Biden administration has used to welcome hundreds of thousands of refugees and migrants from Afghanistan, certain Latin American countries, Haiti and Ukraine.
The administration's openness to negotiate restrictive immigration changes with Republicans has angered migrant advocates, progressive Democrats and Latino lawmakers, who have urged the White House and Senate Democrats to refrain from agreeing to permanent asylum restrictions.
"Destroying the asylum system will not fix the southern border," Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal said Tuesday. "We did not spend years fighting this agenda under Trump only to give in to Senate Republicans' extreme demands now."
It is called governance.
You are out of your depth of understanding of politics, negotiating, and basically everything else.
For the ignorant the operant phrases are:
1. Bipartisan deal
2. Senate Republicans' extreme demands now."
Get it? Good Grief.
Boomer fuck yeah as in real yippie. No that is not a typo a yippie is a political hippie a real liberal socialist not a sunshine liberal.
You. Are. Dumb. I never stated it was the Southern Border, numbnuts. Did Genocide Joe not tip you off as to the location, and the context for our implication in said genocide?
Out of my depth? You're not even on the correct hypocritical position. Time for you to hang it up gramps, Agent Orange rotted that skull.
All the people you've quoted are neo-lib shills, so don't mind me if I shit on them,.and anyone else that buys into half measures.
Arch2, NOT OUR FUCKING COUNTRY to deal with. We don't own the world. We don't have the right to police it no matter how much political bullshit propagated that idea. We do not have any tax dollars to spend on Israel. We used up the limited discretionary funds allowed to be used to respond to such matters with Ukraine, earlier this year. Congress is who you need to harp to. Take it up with the House of Representatives. Until then, shut the fuck up and quit bitching at us who has absolutely no authority to do a fucking thing regarding the issue until November of 2024. All we get to do is vote. Bitching at us now, is hopeless waste of fucking time. None of us here has any clout in Congress or the President. All we are are shitheads sitting in front of a computer screen being assholes to each other. Am I making my point fucking clear enough.
Wasn't there a meme that went something like "Listening to liberals discuss how everything is just so difficult to fix (israel-palestine, border crisis, gun violence etc etc) makes clear how slavery went on for so long"?
The republicans are vicious but at least they get things done. Too bad its not what we want.
Let's not forget Obama - who i supported - did jack shit about abortion. Democrats are more invested, interested in winning some kind fleeting and feck less moral position, rather than achieving material gains for working class. The ruling class will always tell you the path to salvation ruins through compromise.
Bullshit.
I do appreciate Obama for, well Obamacare, but thats pretty much it. Nothing else done about abortion, immigration and lets not forget the drone warfare idea that killed thousands.
And yes, material gains are perhaps supposed to be too low-brow for liberal intelligentsia.
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.“ Sen McConnell 2010. [this is probably the only win for the GOP, the Party of NO…policy wise, they haven’t and continue to not be able to advance any coherent platforms. They passed a tax bill to benefit the rich: woohoo!]
But yeah, let’s throw the failure to pass a remarkably popular policy platform at Obama’s feet for failing to overcome the very intentional & very organized obstruction under a Congress that held a legitimate voting majority for Obama for about two months. Obamacare fwiw is a huge compromise from what it was intended to be. But it offers essential small victories that people of all stripes, esp those living with low or no wages, still appreciate (pre-existing conditions, preventative care coverage, etc).
Doubling down on absolutist policies only ensures nothing gets done. Stop encouraging a politics of posturing for media clicks.
Stop suggesting that the only way to have a better life is to cooperate and compromise with fascists.
Obama, on day one, could have codified Roe, did he? No. He had 60 votes, an overwhelming support of the party, and the country. A goddamn layup, and he's a guy that could hit 3s. So don't bore me with Senator Turtle.
No, he couldn’t. that is fantasy.
@jovan I hope you can understand that proposing compromise over doing nothing doesn’t equal accepting fascism as acceptable.
Except it does when you're accepting compromise between legislators who are writing laws that restrict the ability of groups of people to exist (republican congress) and the (democrat) executive branch who happily passes them, all while saying "it's okay! We're compromising!"
You are worried about republicans fiddling with public elementary school libraries but cool with Hamas? The cognitive dissonance is wild.
The gun safety law...was it not worthwhile? It didn't gather significant traction on gun regulation. It was a baby step in the right direction. One day that step will matter. Similarly, LGBTQ rights don't materialize overnight. But same sex marriage became a thing because the country started to see humanity in their fellow gay citizens. It happened over time. It's not done either. Similarly, change will happen over time on other issues. Intractability and purity of purpose rarely moves the needle, if at all, where baby steps actually DO move the needle. One doesn't have to be amoral to compromise.
Also, please stop hyperbolizing your statements ("and the (democrat) executive branch who happily passes them"). It delegitimizes your stated opinions when the assertions made are not true because you turned them up to 11 for effect. I suspect you have a reasonable basis for your opinion that isn't hyperbole; please stick with that.
He has passed more positive legislation since LBJ maybe even FDR. Not perfect but forward movement. Progress is infuriating slow. It takes perseverance and tenacity.
"A fantasy" well, yes, you may be right. The reality is that Democratic party elites would rather campaign on saving Roe, than actually saving Roe. They are actually more interested in campaigning on LGBTQ and Trans issues, thank actually doing anything tangible for those issues. They are actually more interested in campaigning on getting out of endless wars, immigration issues, than actually legislating for the same. And they are actually more interested in talking about student loan debt, than actually doing anything about student loan debt.
As for day 1. I don't know if you know how Congress works, but he had a fillibuster proof majority, 60 votes in the senate. On day one.
And Biden. He decided to play games with Build Back Better. He decided to cede ground to the two most duplicitous DINOs in his party, and let them turn something that could have wrecked the idiocy of child poverty, and solidified child tax credits. Paid family and medical leave, gone. Free community college, gone. Universal pre-k, gone.
Who did the hard work leaving Afghanistan?
As for obama's super majority, it was hampered by byrd's absence for health, kennedy's death, and franken not getting seated for 7mos...wiki says it totaled 72 days before the next cycle's election. How long do you think it takes to make significant legislation?
Again. I'm sorry, but an issue that has been infinitely important to most women in this country, and you want to tell me, that Democrats didn't have legislation already constructed, knowing that O'Connell was aiming to make Obama a one term? OK. Sure. I'll go with that absolute lack of critical foresight. Typical. But then again, they'd have to actually campaign on issues dealing with real substance, like taxes, wealth redistribution, card check, minimum wage, ending homelessness, child poverty, and oh by the way, pissing off the donor class and ruling elites.
As for the super majority;
February 4, 2010: Republican Scott Brown's election to the Senate ended the Democratic super-majority. November 2, 2010: 2010 general elections, in which Republicans regained control of the House while the Democrats remained in control of the Senate.
Afghanistan. Out of the kettle, and into the Ukraine. Got billions for weapons, nothing for you and me. What are the material solutions for America's problems by getting involved in Ukraine again?
Nordstream pipeline. Great for the planet there Joe. But hey, as long as Blackrock and the Military Industrial Complex is happy.
Build Bomb Better Biden
The solution is assassinate Putin. Then remove his regime. Then get out of the business of policing the world. Just one bullet and a good skilled sniper and Putin is done and over. Stop wasting billions when a $100,000 and a 50 caliber bullet and rifle is what you need. You get the idea. Russia will finally have a real election and maybe even back off from Ukraine. Then U.S. also needs to make material steps of getting out of the business of policing the world and spend time taking care of itself.
b3ta, your bad faith responses are unfortunate. "I'll go with that absolute lack of critical foresight." Sure, make up your own story. Your prerogative to speculate. Just don't pretend it's actually factual.
At least you didn't try to argue leaving Afghanistan wasn't Biden's direction or try to double down that Obama had two years of super majority.
At least you didn't try present Biden's getting the US out of a lost cause, and into another lost cause was to our benefit. As to bad faith, your selective memory is disconcerting. Obama and Democrats lacked the fortitude and vision to get Roe codified, anyone saying otherwise has tongue and lips firmly planted on the donkey's taint.
When was the super majority again? Wasn't that in the middle of a recession that borderlined depression that was caused by the decisions made during the time period of the previous President?
God and Democrats love incrementalism, maybe it's the mental part?
The only way to codify it so it would be supreme court proof is an amendment to the United States Constitution. Unless Democrats had no less than two thirds majority in BOTH houses would that ever get codified there. Republicans won't vote for it. It's not just passing a bill into law. You need such a majority that the Democrats needs 0 votes in both houses from the Republicans. There hasn't been such in how f---ing long if ever?
If you want to make it a right, it has to be in the Constitution as an amendment. Otherwise, a mere law would be stricken as unconstitutional by this Supreme Court.
SOD said The republicans are vicious but at least they get things done.
I am laughing so hard I can't type.
At least the trains ran on time.
That is what the Italians said about Mussolini.
How do you expect anyone to take you all seriously when you say shit like that?
The same party that is actually what is keeping things from happening. The same party that took 15 times to select their Speaker of the House earlier in 2023 just to vote him out making him the only speaker of the house to be removed from the position following a motion to vacate and third-shortest term as Speaker of the House in U.S. history. The same party that caused the government shutdowns during Obama's time? The same party that couldn't fucking pass a budget and had to resort to a continuing resolution since September. If you ever actually read the Constitution of the United States, you would know where the responsibility for budget lies.... in the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Which party runs the house? What party spends precious time on the congressional floor filibustering on nonsensical shit that has nothing to do with responsibilities of Congress and fighting with themselves in the most asinine way. Even though the Democrats have from time to time wasted time and done some stupid shit, the Republicans have been consistently stupid. They couldn't govern ever during Trump's time. Anything that got done was because of Democrats. At least, any time since George W. Bush was President. Back then, both parties were responsible to some degree. Currently, only the Democrats actually function in a responsible manner to some measure, albeit there are room for improvement. Ever since Newt Gingrich, the Republicans have been on a downward spiral to the inane, stupid, and ridiculous. They have been everything fucked up on purpose. When they do anything, they fuck up consistency. Almost, like it is on purpose or absolute incompetence. While a few dinosaurs of respectable Republicans existed but they are almost all retiring from politics and most already left. A good percentage of intellectually competent Republicans have left the party. Those that remain are mostly the worst of the worst shitheads in America. People too f---ed up to be accepted in any respectable society. People who are too f---ed up to be good law abiding citizens. They wouldn't be respected in the Democrat party because there is a big cultural disconnect between responsible adults and lawless derelict stupid f---tards. Trump is popular among these asshats because he is a lawless crook that is f---ing them for his own gain. What real accomplishment has the Republicans done since Ronald Reagan --> Bush jr. era? This party did have some sensible values albeit loaded with issues. On the other hand, Democrats have been doing more domestically. If you want to go fight Israel or Hamas, then just go volunteer yourself to fight and even die. That is your personal choice. Don't expect U.S. taxpayer dollars to be spent fighting either Israel or Hamas or both. We just aren't going to be fighting this war. Neither side wants us. The innocent people also don't want us. They want U.N. intervention. They don't want ugly America involved. They do want Israel to stop indiscriminate killing. We all do. Republicans are the ones holding up funds for responding to the Israel issue as well as Ukraine. More specifically, the MAGA sect of the Republican party who controls the party by the balls because most of the other Republicans are spineless . They have empty sacks between their legs. MAGA wackos are incapable of being negotiated with because they are incapable of acting and behaving as responsible adults. They are in large part a terrorist group and are themselves sponsors of the insurrections. These people are enemies of the United States so we need to simply send these assholes to a blacksite prison on a floating ship in international waters having the worst days of the remainder of their lives until and then tossed overboard after they die as food for the fish. They are not in Congress to accomplish anything good. They are there to undermine the United States. This is because they are there serving DONALD J. TRUMP who plans to become a dictator. So again, they have no purpose for good. They are enemies of the Constitution, and our democracy centered Republic.
GrampArch, let's do it this way...
Beta, that drawing is not to scale. That gap should be much wider.
1. My hair is longer. 2. Insert image of handwriting on a wall with characters with question marks in bubbles over their heads. 3. Your hearts are in the right place. 4. You just don't understand the realities of an asymmetrical social/political landscape and how to deal with it.
Arch2: That's disgustingly patronizing.
Trump was not playing nice with the deep state. That’s the true reason why they wanted him gone so bad. He is a bid goon with a self centered business minded approach, but he his business interests (development) were not in alignment with the main US business interests (military
industrial complex )
I'm just curious:
The people that continue to participate in this 'discussion'. Do you think think you're going to change anyone's mind on this? It sure seems like you're just 'debating' to hear yourself talk.
I'm wondering what any of you are actually doing to make the killing stop.
Carry on.
Voting? Talking to my representatives? Talking to my colleagues & friends?
Not sure what else I'm in a position to do
That's doing something proto! I think the majority of the people posting on this are only posting about it. They aren't actually doing anything.
Thinking is good. Debate is an exercise in thinking and learning. Voting only matters if the public is intellectually engaged.
I'd argue that this thread contains very little thinking and no debate. It's just a few users shouting ' I'm right, you're wrong ' at the same time.
I can't even get anyone to actually read the initial post regarding International Law, and what is and isn't genocide, or what is allowed in an occupier/occupied relationship. So, do me a favor, at least argue in good faith, and do the thread some fucking decency and don't engage in hypotheticals.
Good point. It is starting to get just annoying than changing of any sort of opinion. I trust Biden over Trump. No one else comes close to being a viable candidate to getting enough votes to win the election so it would harm Biden more than Trump. Trump's followers are largely religiously devout to him so they'll vote for him. Biden's supporters are sane human beings, mostly. So most won't be religiously devoted to Biden like a religious cult. Without that level of devout religious following, Biden's supporters are more likely to vote more freely. All supporters of Trump WILL vote for Trump. If they are still supporting him then nothing will change their mind. They are so devoted that they are practically worshipping Donald Trump. Joe Biden doesn't have religious followers. Joe's supporters supports his overall agenda not necessarily everything. This means they are more likely to have some percentage of them that will vote for some other person. That plays to Trump's benefit more than Biden. Trump's supporters are religious zealots of Trump as their God. Just one vote is all it takes to make the difference who wins the election.
Now, I am not blaming the OP of this thread. I do find the thread's direction is kind of going into a more annoying direction. It's feeling like some here are begging us, me for example, to stop the war in Israel-Palestine. For damn sake, I do not have any authority to get U.S. involved or get anyone in the U.S. leadership level to do anything.
Unless you are some kid in elementary school, nothing you write to the President goes all the way to the President. No matter who is in office. It just doesn't happen. The President doesn't actually receive letters from regular adult American citizens who are not writing on behalf of a government agency. Your letter would otherwise get filtered out by administrative staff under the President and you may or may not get a response. If you do, it is more like a generic pre-canned response letter where they say, thank you for your letter and we'll consider your input among others and pretty much no committal to anything you said. Basically, a nice "thank you but we're too busy to really bother the President with actually sending this on to him or her to personally read and respond to". It's more like those auto-sent messages you get confirming receipt of the message. This doesn't mean they'll do anything with it other than send it to the circular file.
Chad Im extremely sorry to be shouting "you are effing wrong" to all those who say "this problem is too complex to solve" and look the other way.
Every member of Congress has received probably no less than 10 letters on this matter from constituents just this week alone. What is one more letter going to do that a 1000+ letters haven't already done or already failed to do? I'm not wasting time writing a letter just so it be thrown on the file that gets shredded and put in the circular file to be dumped with rest of the trash next trash pickup. I'm pretty much not going to hold my breath.
If I was important enough of a person for any of them to give a fuck, maybe.
b3tadine[sutures] wrote:
I can't even get anyone to actually read the initial post regarding International Law, and what is and isn't genocide, or what is allowed in an occupier/occupied relationship. So, do me a favor, at least argue in good faith, and do the thread some fucking decency and don't engage in hypotheticals.
I read your initial post and it's links. It's the only critical thinking going on in this thread. The rest of the thread, and the rest of your posts are just shouting 'I'm right and you're wrong'.
Again, what is anyone involved in this shouting match actually doing to try and make positive change in this horrible situation. Simply shouting at each other online isn't accomplishing anything. You're not 'educating' or 'informing' others about what's going on. All you're doing is shouting to others that already agree with you while making other disregard your views.
You're being disingenuous. First, I'm not shouting. Second, I'm right, because I'm actually citing reality, facts, and the laws the world established after The Holocaust. I'm not both siding this, I'm actually acknowledging a reality, and hypothetical, that Americans would never accept, and never acknowledge.
In the meantime, the carnage of civilians continues as part of a "total solution" by the Israeli government, the army, and with the aid of other nations such as US.
The US is the primary sponsor of this genocide, let us get that striaght.
The US is actively participating in it and supplying money, military backing, ammunition, and immoral support!
Nearly twenty thousand people have been killed. Most of them are children, mothers, and the elderly. Does that fact count for anything? Do you have children?
Yes and that is what I am saying - the genocide is carried out with US funds, with US arms, US expertise, but with Israeli soliders. Horrible.
Because Israel was and is a U.S. ally. The Hamas weapons, some like machine guns were U.S. made that Taliban acquired sometime during the end of Trump's era and early days of Biden's presidency during the pulling out of Afghanistan, and Hamas acquired from Taliban. Israel has always acquired weapons from U.S. as an ally nation-state that had been instrumental in the war in Iraq. Israel has been a strategic and tactical ally. Israel's use of those weapons for atrocities is probably reason for discontinuing any further aid or involvement with the Middle East. Israel is a villain now as is Hamas. Put it simply, no one is a good guy. As a nation, it is a waste of our resources. It would be time to say, we are done giving aid or otherwise having any further involvement. Let UN and the international community address it and take the lead with the response. The one thing we need to do is remove the nuclear weapons from Israel. Denuclearize Israel and Iran. We can keep close by regarding any nuclear weapon deployment from Iran. Other than that, we stay out it.
The US has many allies but it supports Israel as if it were a US state. Actually a lot of US states do not receive as much attention as much as Israel does.
I always had a lot of respect for Israel as a nation with its innovation, technology etc, but it seems like a load of BS, as the only reason all of that is possible there is with US funds.
U.S. have dome that with many of its allies. It does that with Japan, South Korea..
OK, let's cut to the chase. Have you considered the national security implications if Israel's enemies (all of the middle east and the Islamic terrorists throughout) got a hold of the nukes Israel that are based on U.S. technology but made by Israel and packaged on Israel's Jericho series Missile platform and other WMDs in Israel's possession? Issues long before Biden was president and goes back before he was in Congress.
What would happen if we abandon Israel, entirely? It can be more concerning what happens if Israel falls and that stuff gets proliferated by terrorists.
No one is talking about abandoning Israel, but curbing military aid. For a country that has been around 78 years, their economy is doing quite well and they can take care of their shit. Alternatively if the US still wanted to be in bed with them, there is still no reason for abetting genocide. Our power could be used to create a harmonious situation for both the Israelis and Palestinians. But oh wait, then the military industrial complex wont survive. Scratch all that.
Indeed, Israel's GDP per capita is 52k per person, which is better off than most countries. Cut them loose, and support countries with actual poverty.
I can support curbing aid or conditions to aid where innocent people are not to be target and that Israel is to use different tactics to more surgical targeting Hamas without collateral harm to non combatants. Israel is a nation-state and should apply higher standards. While Hamas, a non-government are terrorists and not a nation state, we can't order them to adhere to such convention, but Israel is more than capable of addressing Hamas without indiscriminately killing non combatants. They have the training so there is no excuse. I also support a shift towards moving some of that support elsewhere perhaps as you said. If I was President of U.S., I would do what I said. Penalty for failure can be harsh such as international sanctions, embargoes, etc. We would keep necessary contingency for making sure as much possible that certain things are not getting into the wrong hands. Our military industrial complex won't go out of business.... there is always another a--hole that needs to get his/her/their ass kicked.
Here's what the hawkish grandpas (Biden, McConnell etc) are upto:
PENTAGON TAPS “TIGER TEAM” TO RUSH WEAPONS TO ISRAEL
Why do we support Israel? Well, if you look hard enough you might be able to tell.
Sorry, this map is stupid at best, racist at worst.
The "democracy" in the US is flailing quite a bit when 75% of the country does not want this genocide to happen but Genocide Joe is still arming Israel to the hilt. If you think 18,000 dead civilians = democracy, we dont really want it.
A map, that's what we're working from here, seriously? I am curious, by who's definition of "democracy" are we working with here? What are the interests of the west in those countries that are the least democratic?
Architects For Gaza
Warning: quite stingy but to the point as an opinion piece.
"This Advent, this season of Festivals of Light, celebrating the sun’s return, is a reenactment of the foundational metaphoric tales of our cultures, only in a macabre, mocking travesty. As MLK did, and would again put it, it is the liturgy of a final approach to spiritual death."
https://www.counterpunch.org/2...
My Christian Palestinian friends here are helpless, devastated, and humiliated (their words).
Congratulations to Israel for dragging us into another genocide on poor, hungry folk in the name of "enabling commerce". Pretty sure Genocide Joe and his buddies are very happy. now.
US and UK launch strikes against Houthi rebels in Yemen
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.