Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Jill Stein’s platform is, explicitly, not to win but to cause Harris to lose. Harris losing means Trump winning. Trump winning will be even worse for Gaza (and Ukraine, the US, and the rest of the world).
If your red line is Gaza, but your refusal to cross that line will make things in Gaza worse, it is straightforwardly the case that your tactics are wrong. ‘I cannot condone X, so I’m going to do something that can only make X even worse’ is not a position you can hold.
First, that is not her platform and you’re just making up and repeating MSM Democrat propaganda. Second, Kamala is part of the current administration that has had the ability to take a different stance on Gaza. Stop blaming the voters and start demanding she change her position. If she loses it will be her fault and no one elses. Last, people voting for their preferred candidate that they think best represents them is the foundation of democracy. If you don’t like democracy then vote for Democrats or Republicans who think they don’t need to earn your vote.
Here’s a member of the Stein campaign saying they know they can’t win and want Harris to lose: ‘We are not in a position to win the White House, but we do have a real opportunity to win something historic. We could deny Kamala Harris the state of Michigan.’ This is straight from the Stein campaign. Not ‘MSM Democrat propaganda’ at all, but the Stein campaign itself acknowledging that they can’t win and that what they mean by ‘winning’ is Harris losing - which entails Trump winning.
Again, you can blame anyone you like for this, but if you vote for Stein, the consequences for Gazans will be worse. To do so is, per your own values, nonsensical.
Your assumption is that these third party voters would be inclined to vote for Kamala if they weren’t voting for Stein. There is nothing to support that claim by you. In fact, it is the opposite. They’d be inclined to vote for Kamala if she shifted her policy positions when it comes to the war in Afghanistan. Again, you can blame anyone you like for this, but if Kamala doesn’t change her position, the consequences for Americans will be worse. To do so, is per Kamala’s “own” values, nonsensical.
I’m not assuming that you are inclined to vote for Harris - you’ve made it clear that you are not!
What I’m saying is that the course of action you’re advocating (voting for Jill Stein) can only have the opposite outcome to the one you want (because it will lead to the election of Donald Trump and a still worse situation in the Middle East). This being the case, you should reconsider your course of action.
I’m always re-evaluating my decision. There is still time for Harris to publicly denounce the genocide and call it for what it is and commit to stopping the funding the Israeli war machine. It’s really her choices more than anything that impacts what happens. She has to earn votes.
According you Democrats people voting for Stein were already supporting Trump. Harris can earn votes by committing to stop funding the Israeli war machine committing genocide. No one owes her votes though, but it does appear she owes AIPAC a lot.
Like I’ve said, it’s not a matter of owing her votes. I just think that you shouldn’t use your vote in a way that will make things worse.
I’ve not ascribed any views to you beyind what you’ve said here, and I’d appreciate if you didn’t do the same to me. I don’t think you support Trump, but it is a fact that your current plans make a Trump win more likely. It’s precisely because I don’t believe you support Trump (and in particular what he’d do in Gaza) that I think you should reconsider that plan.
Anyway, we’re going round in circles here. Unless you can show to me that voting for Stein will have something other than a wholly negative outcome for Gaza or anywhere else, I’m not going to change my view that it’s a mistake for you to do so.
Orrrrr, stay with me here, 50,000 people is an insignificant number of people in the context of preventing a greater war with Iran that would directly kill millions and millions of people. Trump has openly endorsed that war, so doing a thing to help elect Trump is not in any sense a strategy aimed at protecting the lives and rights of anyone in the middle east. On the other hand, standing by our ally and avoiding that war gives the western world a modicum of stability and a base of democratic governance to work with for the next hundred years. Don’t talk about the lives of anyone if you’re planning to help elect Trump because he is the actual supporter of genocide. It took Gaza one year to see 50,000 dead. You’re talking about “let’s elect a guy that wants to see 50,000 people die every week.” Shove it. You’re lying to yourself and to everyone here.
The war in Gaza has displaced what, two or three million people. A war between Israel and Iran will displace tens of millions of people. North Africa, East Africa, probably West Africa, the Mediterranean nations including Spain, France, and Italy, Greece, obviously, Eastern Europe and the Balkans, Western Asia, and South Central Asia including the Indian subcontinent. They don’t have enough stress already for you? There’s already a war refugee crisis from people fleeing war and turmoil in Syria and Yemen.
The continued stability of this massive region of the world is not worth it to you, because, let me see if this is right, you’re so enraged at Kamala Harris for following decades of American foreign policy in the face of 50,000 people being killed by a country she’s not in charge of?
I’m sorry, that’s totally idiotic and short sighted.
And just to add to your point: it’s not hypothetical that Trump would destabilise the Middle East, because he actually did so in his first term by giving de facto recognition to Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and by unilaterally tanking the Iran deal in exchange for nothing. The current situation is already partially Trump’s fault and, as you say, he will only make it worse if he wins.
What an insane statement completely dehumanizing the people of Gaza. No, enabling Israel to genocide Gaza is not a ‘necessary evil’ or for the ‘greater good’ to prevent a larger war. There is no justification for genocide. Ever. It’s so gross to see this kind of sentiment upvoted, especially on Lemmy.
Israel is escalating to continue it’s genocidal war. The US has enabled Israel for an entire year, which has galvanized Israel to expand it’s war without any repercussions. The US failing to reign Israel in is directly responsible for the escalation.
Israel ending it’s genocide in Gaza has been the one way to avoid regional escalations, and it’s the one thing Israel has repeatedly evaded.
For the past 12 months, the world has watched in horror as Israel has laid waste to Gaza in what Palestinians and many experts consider a genocidal military campaign—one of the most lethal and destructive bombing campaigns in history—armed and funded by the U.S. government.
This support for Israel violates both U.S. and international law. It also goes against the wishes of a majority of Americans. Polls consistently show that most Americans want a ceasefire in Gaza and to stop weapons transfers to Israel (including 77% of Democrats) amid the death and destruction.
As president of the United States, Biden cannot afford to back Israel’s total freedom of action in Gaza. He cannot assume that Israeli aims fully coincide with those of the United States. As Biden himself had noted, this is the most extreme government in Israel’s history, with prominent Jewish supremacist ministers whose stated aims conflict with both U.S. interests and values and seek an opportunity to expel Palestinians from what they see as the land of Israel, including Gaza. And Netanyahu is known to have attempted over the years to draw the United States into a war with Iran, something that’s decidedly not in the United States’ interests
Plenty of officials and analysts suspect Netanyahu’s main motivation for staying in office is that he is hoping his far-right allies can help protect him from having to face charges ranging from fraud to bribery in multiple cases, including one in which he’s accused of inappropriately accepting gifts from wealthy businessmen. Netanyahu denies wrongdoing.
Armed groups throughout the region, including Hezbollah, have long declared that their military actions are directly tied to the ongoing genocide of Gaza. Despite U.S. efforts to frame Lebanon as an isolated front, Hezbollah has made clear there will be no deescalation without a cease-fire in Gaza. Only an end to the assault on Gaza can prevent further escalation.
Oh sweet summer child with indequate media literacy.
At any rate after a year of the horrid and most atrocious genocidal madness, all the observations and evidence, and presuming that every sensational claim and all the buzzwords are 100% true, that all the bombing was indiscriminate, that the imminent famine was imminent, all of it…99% of Gaza is still alive.
On 26 January 2024, the ICJ said that it was plausible that Israel had breached the Genocide Convention. As an emergency measure, it ordered Israel ensure that its army refrained from genocidal acts against Palestinians.
The ICJ reported, as part of its decisions in March and May, that the situation in Gaza had deteriorated and that Israel had failed to abide by its order in January.
So, when we look at the actions taken, the dropping of thousands and thousands of bombs in a couple of days, including phosphorus bombs, as we heard, on one of the most densely populated areas around the world, together with these proclamations of intent, this indeed constitutes genocidal killing, which is the first act, according to the convention, of genocide. And Israel, I must say, is also perpetrating act number two and three — that is, causing serious bodily or mental harm, and creating condition designed to bring about the destruction of the group by cutting off water, food, supply of energy, bombing hospitals, ordering the fast evictions of hospitals, which the World Health Organization has declared to be, quote, “a death sentence.” So, we’re seeing the combination of genocidal acts with special intent. This is indeed a textbook case of genocide.
More than 800 scholars of international law and genocide have signed a public statement arguing that the Israeli military may be committing genocidal acts against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as the total siege and relentless airstrikes continue to inflict devastation on the occupied territory.
An independent United Nations expert warned Monday that “Israel’s genocidal violence risks leaking out of Gaza and into the occupied Palestinian territory as a whole” as Western governments, corporations, and other institutions keep up their support for the Israeli military, which stands accused of grave war crimes in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.
Our documentation encompasses over 500 incitements of violence and genocidal incitement, appearing in the forms of social media posts, television interviews, and official statements from Israeli politicians, army personnel, journalists, and other influential personalities.
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.
Jill Stein’s platform is, explicitly, not to win but to cause Harris to lose. Harris losing means Trump winning. Trump winning will be even worse for Gaza (and Ukraine, the US, and the rest of the world).
If your red line is Gaza, but your refusal to cross that line will make things in Gaza worse, it is straightforwardly the case that your tactics are wrong. ‘I cannot condone X, so I’m going to do something that can only make X even worse’ is not a position you can hold.
First, that is not her platform and you’re just making up and repeating MSM Democrat propaganda. Second, Kamala is part of the current administration that has had the ability to take a different stance on Gaza. Stop blaming the voters and start demanding she change her position. If she loses it will be her fault and no one elses. Last, people voting for their preferred candidate that they think best represents them is the foundation of democracy. If you don’t like democracy then vote for Democrats or Republicans who think they don’t need to earn your vote.
Here’s a member of the Stein campaign saying they know they can’t win and want Harris to lose: ‘We are not in a position to win the White House, but we do have a real opportunity to win something historic. We could deny Kamala Harris the state of Michigan.’ This is straight from the Stein campaign. Not ‘MSM Democrat propaganda’ at all, but the Stein campaign itself acknowledging that they can’t win and that what they mean by ‘winning’ is Harris losing - which entails Trump winning.
Again, you can blame anyone you like for this, but if you vote for Stein, the consequences for Gazans will be worse. To do so is, per your own values, nonsensical.
Inconvenient for that user, so they didn’t respond
In fairness to the guy, he has now responded.
Your assumption is that these third party voters would be inclined to vote for Kamala if they weren’t voting for Stein. There is nothing to support that claim by you. In fact, it is the opposite. They’d be inclined to vote for Kamala if she shifted her policy positions when it comes to the war in Afghanistan. Again, you can blame anyone you like for this, but if Kamala doesn’t change her position, the consequences for Americans will be worse. To do so, is per Kamala’s “own” values, nonsensical.
I’m not assuming that you are inclined to vote for Harris - you’ve made it clear that you are not!
What I’m saying is that the course of action you’re advocating (voting for Jill Stein) can only have the opposite outcome to the one you want (because it will lead to the election of Donald Trump and a still worse situation in the Middle East). This being the case, you should reconsider your course of action.
I’m always re-evaluating my decision. There is still time for Harris to publicly denounce the genocide and call it for what it is and commit to stopping the funding the Israeli war machine. It’s really her choices more than anything that impacts what happens. She has to earn votes.
And if she doesn’t, you’ll use your vote to make things worse? As I say, doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.
According you Democrats people voting for Stein were already supporting Trump. Harris can earn votes by committing to stop funding the Israeli war machine committing genocide. No one owes her votes though, but it does appear she owes AIPAC a lot.
Like I’ve said, it’s not a matter of owing her votes. I just think that you shouldn’t use your vote in a way that will make things worse.
I’ve not ascribed any views to you beyind what you’ve said here, and I’d appreciate if you didn’t do the same to me. I don’t think you support Trump, but it is a fact that your current plans make a Trump win more likely. It’s precisely because I don’t believe you support Trump (and in particular what he’d do in Gaza) that I think you should reconsider that plan.
Anyway, we’re going round in circles here. Unless you can show to me that voting for Stein will have something other than a wholly negative outcome for Gaza or anywhere else, I’m not going to change my view that it’s a mistake for you to do so.
Orrrrr, stay with me here, 50,000 people is an insignificant number of people in the context of preventing a greater war with Iran that would directly kill millions and millions of people. Trump has openly endorsed that war, so doing a thing to help elect Trump is not in any sense a strategy aimed at protecting the lives and rights of anyone in the middle east. On the other hand, standing by our ally and avoiding that war gives the western world a modicum of stability and a base of democratic governance to work with for the next hundred years. Don’t talk about the lives of anyone if you’re planning to help elect Trump because he is the actual supporter of genocide. It took Gaza one year to see 50,000 dead. You’re talking about “let’s elect a guy that wants to see 50,000 people die every week.” Shove it. You’re lying to yourself and to everyone here.
The war in Gaza has displaced what, two or three million people. A war between Israel and Iran will displace tens of millions of people. North Africa, East Africa, probably West Africa, the Mediterranean nations including Spain, France, and Italy, Greece, obviously, Eastern Europe and the Balkans, Western Asia, and South Central Asia including the Indian subcontinent. They don’t have enough stress already for you? There’s already a war refugee crisis from people fleeing war and turmoil in Syria and Yemen.
The continued stability of this massive region of the world is not worth it to you, because, let me see if this is right, you’re so enraged at Kamala Harris for following decades of American foreign policy in the face of 50,000 people being killed by a country she’s not in charge of?
I’m sorry, that’s totally idiotic and short sighted.
And just to add to your point: it’s not hypothetical that Trump would destabilise the Middle East, because he actually did so in his first term by giving de facto recognition to Jerusalem as the Israeli capital and by unilaterally tanking the Iran deal in exchange for nothing. The current situation is already partially Trump’s fault and, as you say, he will only make it worse if he wins.
What an insane statement completely dehumanizing the people of Gaza. No, enabling Israel to genocide Gaza is not a ‘necessary evil’ or for the ‘greater good’ to prevent a larger war. There is no justification for genocide. Ever. It’s so gross to see this kind of sentiment upvoted, especially on Lemmy.
Israel is escalating to continue it’s genocidal war. The US has enabled Israel for an entire year, which has galvanized Israel to expand it’s war without any repercussions. The US failing to reign Israel in is directly responsible for the escalation.
Israel ending it’s genocide in Gaza has been the one way to avoid regional escalations, and it’s the one thing Israel has repeatedly evaded.
Biden Can End His Failure in the Middle East—if He Listens to the American People
Biden’s dangerous stance on the war in Israel and Gaza
The US Is Dealing With an Israeli Leader Who’s Losing Control
Former Israeli PM ‘suspects’ Netanyahu wants to draw the US into conflict with Iran
There Is Still a Way to Prevent a Regional Middle East War: a Cease-Fire in Gaza
Oh sweet summer child with indequate media literacy.
At any rate after a year of the horrid and most atrocious genocidal madness, all the observations and evidence, and presuming that every sensational claim and all the buzzwords are 100% true, that all the bombing was indiscriminate, that the imminent famine was imminent, all of it…99% of Gaza is still alive.
Maybe you’re right and my calculus is off.
!RemindMe in 99 years.
Others: AP News, Time, Reuters, Vox, CBC
Deliberate Attacks on Civilians
Israel deliberately targets civilian areas. From in general with the Dahiya Doctrine to multiple systems deployed in Gaza to do so:
The Dahiya Doctrine & Israel’s Use of Disproportionate Force
‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza
Lavender
Where’s Daddy
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.
Oh god the copy pasta. Please, sweet doe-eyed angel, don’t ever change.
Not as long as you do genocide denial