People either don't seem to understand, or are pretending not to understand for political purposes, that Harris has a very thin line to toe until the election. If she says anything strongly in either way regarding Israel/Palestine, she will lose.
Anyone telling you that she is worse than Trump on the issue is a goddamn liar
People are upset because of the fine line she has to walk, but I have always figured that once she wins the election she'd do the right thing, and this event makes me believe I'm right to have faith.
Harris started her political career by condemning Obama for not perfectly obeying Israel. She votes for Israel every time. She even tells a story how she planted trees for Israel as a child.
The only fine line she is trying to walk is keeping her pro-Palestine voters while doing everything Israel is asking of her.
No one is asking her to do anything as VP, this person is saying harris is committed to enabling israel's genocide and has a history of supporting israel unconditionally. we want her to commit to upholding american laws around not supplying arms genocidal regimes as president; which israel categorically is currently. literally every organization that has investigated israeli conduct in Gaza and now Lebanon has come to the same conclusion. The UN, WHO, our own internal analysis.
They've gone way past self defense and managed to kill more of the hostages than hamas has.
I'd probably lay the majority at their feet. between turning the region into a war zone, starvation etc, the chances of them surviving the situation is close to zero. as far as wikipedia is concerned out of the 251 hostages.....
117 were returned by hamas in a prisoner exchange.
4 were released unilaterally by hamas.
8 were rescued by IDF.
34 bodies have been retrieved (likely dead due to the war zone)
3 bodies returned through unspecified means.
so frankly Israel's track record here for 'rescuing' the hostages is pretty abysmal. and I can't think of a worse way than to turn a region into a war zone to rescue them. so far it looks like hamas has been fairly willing to negotiate prisoner releases. who knows if thats still the case though. since you know we killed off the leader who was looking to get a peace deal. but I doubt many more are going to be returned alive after this. I feel for those families and its unfortunate their countries leadership is going to get most of them killed.
but at the end of the day it doesn't matter who killed those hostages. they're dead and nothing will change that. all I know is turning the region into a blood bath didn't help their chances.
How many people was Israel holding prisoner indefinitely and without charge or access to any representation? I'll answer that for you, a bit over 12000.
How many of those killed on Oct 7 were killed by Israeli forces?
How many innocents have been raped or murdered in isralei custody?
How many dead journalists? Doctors? Aid workers? How many utilities workers (6 more mudered yesterday).
Say what you want, each and every one of those deaths is a war crime.
How many attacks on the UN and UN workers?
Israel has far far dirtier hands than anyone else so I dont think you get to self righteously open with, "How many of these people do you think would be dead if Hamas hadn’t kidnapped them?".
Those are all valid points, most of which I can agree with. But that doesn't mean that Hamas was helping us build a better world when they went on their killing and kidnapping spree. They wanted to restart the hostilities and that's not some noble goal that should make us lie about what they did or act like they're not responsible for the deaths of those they took.
agreed, but you put people in a murderous pressure cooker and keep turning up the heat and it'll expode. Thats part of the burden of being in charge. It speaks to motive and I asribe a lot of the blame to Israel for what happened on Oct 7. You dont oppress people to that level for 80 years and then act surprised when they lose their minds over it.
Sure, but people that pull this argument almost always refuse to look at history from the Israeli side. I'm leaving out the pro-Arab arguments for this purpose but bear with me for what is always conveniently forgotten when lemmings say "they deserved it":
The Gaza strip only came under Israeli control in '67, so in reality the 80 years you mention are 56 years.
From '67 to '91, people could travel freely between Gaza and Israel. After the violence of the First Intifada, this changed, and Israel started requiring personal permits to make sure people coming to Israel had legitimate business there.
The escalations in violence led to the Oslo accords. Groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad vowed to continue the violence until Israel was destroyed, and torpedoed the accords from their side with a series of deadly suicide bomb attacks on public buses in Israel. This led Israel to further tighten the border checkpoints.
Israel withdrew from within Gaza and following the 2007 takeover by Hamas, practically closed the border except for work and medical reasons.
The blockade mostly stopped ground attacks, but Hamas switched their MO to firing missiles. This led to Egypt and Israel progressively tightening their blockade to stop these weapons from being smuggled into Gaza. And Israel to work on a very expensive missile defense, and Israelis living within rocket distance to have to run to shelters almost daily.
And as the daily rocket attacks didn't bring any improvement for Hamas, they planned for the oct 7 attacks.
As I said the above story is onesided, but when I ask someone what else Israel should have done to stop Hamas from wanting to destroy them, the answer always boils down to "don't exist".
"Soon after being elected to the Senate in 2016, Harris earned a reputation as an ardent defender of Israel. She spoke two years in a row at AIPAC conferences and co-sponsored legislation aimed at undermining a United Nations resolution condemning Israel’s illegal annexation of Palestinian land. One of her first international trips as a senator was to Israel where she met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2017. “I support the United States’ commitment to provide Israel with $38 billion in military assistance over the next decade,” Harris told an AIPAC conference that year. “I believe the bonds between the United States and Israel are unbreakable, and we can never let anyone drive a wedge between us. … As long as I’m a United States senator, I will do everything in my power to ensure broad and bipartisan support for Israel’s security and right to self-defense.” Harris has compared building support for Israel to the coalitions forged during the U.S. civil rights movement"
Trump supporters always underreport in polls. She's not holding her own in the swing states. Harris is going to lose and usher in fascism and the end of the republic, all so she can take some sweet, sweet far-right-wing foreign government bribes.
No, just the ones who expect perfect worshipful silence when those we're expected to vote for keep selling weapons for genocide.
The ones who sling accusations of being a trumper/russian/bot as soon as anyone says that Netanyahu is less than god incarnate and that the US should not be selling weapons for genocide just to prop up the political career of a genocidal fascist.
Right, only you are allowed to sling accusations. And if anyone calls you a MAGA it is because they are genocidal. They should have known from the context of you writing the exact same thing as the people who "couldn't possibly vote for anyone but Jill Stein" that you are both against the genocide and know that Donald will be worse.
They should have known from the context of you writing the exact same thing as the people who “couldn’t possibly vote for anyone but Jill Stein” that you are both against the genocide and know that Donald will be worse.
Maybe you shouldn't assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a trumper. But then again, why would you do that? It might mean treating people who think genocide is wrong with some respect, and you have no respect for anyone but Netanyahu.
Case in point. It's not "everyone who disagrees with me," it is specifically disingenuous trolls. You see it as everyone because there is little difference between a troll and yourself.
You write some of the exact same shit as the LARPing Trumpers. Everyone is genocidal unless they agree with absolutely everything you say and do. In fact the only difference between you and them is when you get questioned why Donald is preferable. Then it is "oh, I am voting for Harris, though."
It makes more sense to assume you are indeed a MAGA trying to depress turnout and only lying about your vote to avoid criticism. Truly disgusting how you live a life of deceit. Utterly despicable that you choose to use this to support Repubs expansion of conflict and genocide.
You assumed that I was a trumper the instant I said anything against genocide, and you do so to anyone who disagrees with you on the subject.
Since you have chosen to call me a liar and a trumper, why should I give you the benefit of the doubt should you ever claim that you don't support genocide?
I certainly did not. I have seen your pattern of behavior calling everyone who even slightly disagrees with you a genocidal Netanyahu stan. That is what I am commenting on, not the isolated incident of you doing it yet again. Not the strawman you are whining about "I'm only saying genocide is wrong." You are behaving as the other LARPers do. Constant trolling intentionally to provoke arguments.
You are therefore a liar and a MAGA, as proven by your own behavior regarded with your own standards of evidence.
I don't give the slightest fuck what a MAGA thinks of me. Go give your benefit of the doubt to your LARPing far-right colleagues.
If centrists don't like that they don't get 100% of everything they want, in this case unconditional support for genocide, they can vote blue no matter who.
People generally have really poor reading comprehension. I've been surprised by how bad it is here on lemmy. I've had folks argue against things not even remotely close to what was said, and then other morons will come along to dogpile.
people are scanning, it happens, done it myself. the problem is people are so scared of harris losing they're attacking people who have no interest in supporting harris as a result of this issue and think that will somehow get them to vote harris. shrug
if harris loses she loses and thats on her. she wants to play the law and order candidate while simultaneously not committing to upholding the laws we have on the books and enabling a genocide well thats on her.
Can't help that shes committing the same errors of judgement that biden did and we didn't support him either after he started breaking strikes and enabling genocide.
the problem is people are so scared of harris losing they’re attacking people who have no interest in supporting harris as a result of this issue and think that will someone get them to vote harris. shrug
The people you describe attack Harris voters too. They attack anyone with misgivings about genocide support.
If you're not voting Harris, you're a Trump supporter, yes. Regardless of how you feel about it, that is literally just how our voting system works. We all need to push for a system where third parties matter, but until that actually happens, please live in reality.
If you’re not voting Harris, you’re a Trump supporter, yes.
And I am voting Harris. No reason for any of you to start paying attention to this now, though. You have your single talking point and you're going to repeat it regardless of the actual positions of the person you're talking to.
No, I did. You were saying that her hands are tied because the pro-genocide centrist wing of the party is so fickle that they will stay home or vote Trump if Harris starts disagreeing with you about genocide.
So, if centrists don’t like that they don’t get 100% of everything they want, in this case unconditional support for genocide, they can vote blue no matter who.
Now make up some more conspiracy bullshit about me running a botnet of sockpuppets or whatever it is you do when you can't accept that more than one person is opposed to genocide.
Now make up some more conspiracy bullshit about me running a botnet of sockpuppets or whatever it is you do when you can't accept that more than one person is opposed to genocide.
edit: I scanned over the she modifier sorry. yes that would be true. but shes no better either.
--- remains relevant to others in the thread.
She may lose either way; and you're an idiot if you think people who are disgusted by us supplying weapons to the genocidal regime in israel are worse than trump.
if you're in a swing state vote harris
if you're in a democratic bastion feel free to vote third party, dont worry the majority of the liberal lemmings will vote for harris.
let your reps know you don't support arming israel while they're actively committing a genocide and refusing to commit to a cease fire which is against our laws and harris if she wants to claim is in favor of upholding the law needs to back.
I'd rather put boots on the ground to defend israel than let them continue a genocide of hundreds of thousands of innocents.
I'd add 2a: Even if you don't vote for president be sure to vote down-ballot. You can just leave the president section blank. But don't be tempted to write in someone because that may invalidate your entire ballot.
I love how you're carefully avoiding the Abilene effect and how it could lose the election in even strong states.
Yes, lose. Because
it's a binary choice
non-participation benefits the crueler conservatives
everyone votes in isolation while cognizant of others and assuming their intent
And even if we declare the two viable options - note I said viable there - to be guaranteed as equally detrimental for Gaza when we all know it's not, it simplifies the equation. If we cannot appreciably affect the outcome in our election choice we move to the choice which has the most potential for effect after the election. CLEARLY
And that's the programme. It's been explained so many fucking times that I'm not sure how "but her emails" you need to be not to get it.
This is as clear the nose you sever to spite your face, and it's truly sad to see such cognitive dissonance in someone not voting conservative out of greed or gambler's mindset.
its not, as evidenced by the fact there are 5 options, now as we both obviously know FPTP is a horrible system and leads to a collapse of viable parties, but even in that situation you have 3 options. A,B, Neither. and I'm nethier. neither kamala nor trump have policies that i support. and trump can't impact the larger scheme of things i care about my local government prevents that.
non-participation benefits the crueler conservatives
no its a neutral stance, and you're upset that people dont care about your prefered candidate because she doesn't bring anything to the table that my state doesn't already have. if i lived in texas/florida the equation would be different but i don't and harris will easily win in my state.
And that’s the programme. It’s been explained so many fucking times that I’m not sure how “but her emails” you need to be not to get it.
but you don't get it. harris doesn't bring anything to the table. if i was an arab in michigan right now i'd be looking at her ticket and going:
nothing to help with inflation.
nothing to help with labor rights.
nothing to help with corporate corruption (see above two issues).
and shes literally willing to support killing my family and friends in the middle east.
If voting 3rd candidate gets that person to the poll booth and they vote 3rd party/blank/etc and down ticket dems vs not showing up at all. I take that as a win. Its not our fault harris, the alleged law and order candidate, wouldn't commit to enforcing the law on arms sales. if the zionists have a problem with that, well thats on them, maybe you should bitch about them being intransigent about fucking genocide.
Try to clue in before voting, okay?
already voted mate, maybe get a clue in the future on the entire system before opening your mouth. you're position only is rational by assuming there is only one office on the ballot. sadly harris didn't turn it around in time to win my vote. but thats her fault not mine. I have a laundry list of issues that if she ticket any of them personally I would have voted for her. she didn't. not my fault. genocide was just one of the ones where the ask was so small it should have been a no brainer. If the majority of the zionists are willing to support trump if harris won't sell israel weapons I don't particular care and think you should save your ire for them not me.
I'm not preventing harris from not being genocidal thats on her, I'm not stopping zionists from recognizing that israel's behavior is unconscionable, thats on them. If harris loses because of israel's behavior feel free to bitch at those voters they're the ones who caused the loss by not supporting their brothers and sisters of another faith from being subject to a genocidal war.
I'm not the one preventing us changing our voting system to ranked choice. that's on the DNC/GOP. Hell I've canvased and gathered signatures for the damn thing in my state what have you fucking done to kill the spoiler effect?
I'm simply not going to give my vote to a candidate who won't commit to supporting labor and won't commit to not committing a genocide; especially when it won't change the outcome in any manner.
Abilene effect
also what makes you think we're part of the same group? This simply doesn't apply.
edit: changed jews -> zionists, because its not the jews in america causing this problem.