'Went nuclear': State Department reportedly 'shocked' as Rubio freezes foreign aid
'Went nuclear': State Department reportedly 'shocked' as Rubio freezes foreign aid
State Department officials were reportedly "shocked" as new Secretary of State Marco Rubio froze most foreign aid grants — and the order appears to include military aid to Ukraine.Rubio issued the new guidance Friday, Politico reported, freezing spending on most foreign aid grants for three months....
Summary
New Secretary of State Marco Rubio froze most foreign aid grants for three months, reportedly shocking State Department officials.
The freeze affects military aid to Ukraine, Jordan, and Taiwan, while exempting aid to Egypt and Israel.
Staff were instructed to halt nearly all existing foreign assistance programs immediately.
The move aligns with Trump’s pledge to negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war, as Russia gains ground in the conflict.
Rubio’s decision has raised concerns about the broader implications for U.S. foreign policy and global alliances.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Reread, try again.
I'll admit my leading question was facetious.
My point is that an action was taken against democrats on the topic of Gaza, and yet, the crisis and genocide continue. It was obvious this would happen if trump won, plus a slew of other impacts on at risk people around the world, beyond the admittedly unsatisfactory status quo of the Biden admin. So what societal good was done by not helping keep trump out?
So what societal good was done by not helping keep trump out?
There are two possibilities, either we cost her the election or we didn't. If we didn't, we worked towards building an actual alternative party at zero cost. If we did, then it's even better, because we demonstrated that our support is needed to win.
The Democratic party, particularly the version of it that you believe in enabling, is both fundamentally unacceptable and doomed to failure. The Democrats have chosen to be the party of the status quo, and the status quo is declining and will continue to decline and unless and until they embrace change and an actual vision of the future, they are going to fail. Even if it were possible to "buy time," that's not a valid goal, because time is against us, every minute that passes is a minute where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, the environment is damaged, and the right grows stronger. Only a fundamental shift in the political sphere and the proliferation of leftist narratives and explanations for the decline can possibly stem the fascist tide.
The Democrats can either change into what they need to be or they can be replaced, these are the only two paths forward where I don't end up in a camp. Voting third party furthers both of those goals, while unconditional loyalty to the party only encourages them to continue on a doomed path.
You hope to bring about a new party with zero plan candidate or substance and in turn got additional people hurt.
Accelerationists are dreaming of a survivor fantasy where their perceived position or privledge will keep them or their family alive through the downfall, transition, and reconstruction of what's next. Who's to say what's next isn't 10x worse? You can't.
Not caring about buying time is a privileged position, one that for example afghan refugees who had flights to the US this week and beyond sure would like a bit more of. Oh, whoops, the democrats needed to be taught a lesson so I guess it's ok that they are abandoned now.
It's all good and well to talk theory, but in real life harm reduction is actually helping people.
I'm trans in a red state so I'm certainly not in a privileged position. I still voted PSL. Your "harm reduction" wasn't reducing harm for Gaza and I couldn't vote for genocide to save my own ass. It was about being able to live with myself after the election.
Oh and would you look at that, there's aid trucks entering Gaza and the bombing has stopped. I'm feeling pretty okay with my vote.
I'm not an accelerationist, nor do I have any such fantasies. In the face of continued decline, "what's next" is virtually guaranteed to be 10x worse, that's why the decline must be stopped not continued. If I were an accelerationist, I would be more than happy with either candidate, since both ensured continued decline.
Not caring about buying time is a privileged position
Is that so? Would you consider all the Palestinians who didn't vote for her to be "privileged?"
Obviously this is bullshit, it's just weaponizing progressive language to try to get people to fall in line behind a doomed cause rather than looking at solutions that actually have the potential to improve the lives of marginalized people and stop the rise of the far-right. You might as well say, "It's privileged to support striking workers because they're the ones well off enough to go without pay for a period, have you considered that scabs have families to feed?" Nonsense.
I don't think this way because I'm "privileged," but rather the opposite, because I'm pretty fucking close to the top of the fascists' list so it's easier for me to see that they must be stopped rather than allowing minorities to be sacrificed one by one, "First they came for" style, like the Democrats offer.
As discussed above, conditions will only worsen in Palestine.
Not taking the most realistic action to avoid another trump term is by far the greatest harm.
Suggesting the Dems should be torn down in 2023 or 2024, without a meaningful, competitive replacement is garbage.
People can't hold 2 thoughts at once apparently: "A is bad, but B is worse".
Of course a striking worker isn't privledge, they are standing on the line and could easily be retaliated against.
As discussed above, conditions will only worsen in Palestine.
You seem to have lost the plot, if anything, this just supports the point I was making. Palestinian voters refused to vote for Harris despite indications that things would get worse under Trump. Yet your explanation for this behavior is that they must all be "Privileged," an argument you apparently forgot you were making. How can you possibly argue that their position is privileged when your best case scenario for them is indefinitely continuing genocide? It's absurd.
Suggesting the Dems should be torn down in 2023 or 2024, without a meaningful, competitive replacement is garbage.
And how exactly is a meaningful, competitive replacement supposed to spring into existence if everyone just falls behind them no matter what in every election until the end of time?
Of course a striking worker isn’t privledge, they are standing on the line and could easily be retaliated against.
Yeah, that's the point. It's a nonsense claim dressed up in progressive language, just like your nonsense claim that Palestinians voted the way they did because of privilege.
The societal good of destroying the US, since it's clear the empire can no longer function without genocide. At that point, like all fascist empires, it needs to be destroyed.
The lesser evil option you're advocating for was committed to genocide. There is no world where that's the lesser evil human beings can accept
They enabled turbo genocide. The position is bankrupt as it assumes inaction is faultless and clean.
There is no such thing as 'turbo genocide'. Until you learn that you will be continually surprised by what happens next.
And whoever mentioned inaction? You people just hate any action we take that isn't voting for the same party forever regardless of what they do.
Of course there is. A genocide could be worsened by increasing the rate or killing, the tools available, the loss of global consequences, etc. "Turbo" is used as an offhand way to indicate faster/more/worse.
Conversely slowing a genocide allows more time for people to escape, more time for global interventions, peace talks, etc.
There will be condos on their homes now