this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
628 points (97.1% liked)

World News

40574 readers
2549 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Donald Trump stated that Palestinians displaced by Israel’s military actions would not have a right to return to Gaza under his plan.

Instead, he proposed resettling them in Egypt and Jordan, despite both nations rejecting the idea.

Trump suggested creating permanent refugee communities funded by the U.S., calling Gaza a "real estate development for the future."

His proposal has drawn condemnation from Arab nations and legal experts, with the UN warning it could constitute ethnic cleansing and violate international law.

Israel’s far-right settlers welcomed the plan.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] subignition@fedia.io 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

But you do see how that's still better, right? Kamala would at least have been open to public pressure, meaning it could have been possible to pull the emergency brake a little harder. Trump isn't gonna change his mind for fuck all, and isn't just releasing the brake, but slamming his foot on the gas.

[–] brendansimms@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yes, Kamala would have been better. But she lost, and thats on her. This geno cide has been going on for 75 years and she gave no indication that she would do anything to stop it.

[–] subignition@fedia.io 1 points 14 hours ago

No, that's not entirely on her. It sucks that she didn't step out of line from Biden's stance on Israel. But it also sucks that a lot of Democratic voters decided their personal feelings of moral sanctimony justified electing someone with a drastically worse stance on the issue.

I don't think there's been an election in living memory where people liked 100% of the candidate's policy. Your duty as a voter is to make the most suitable choice from among the viable candidates. People who claimed they couldn't vote for Kamala because she wouldn't oppose Israel's genocide, and who abstained from voting, directly contributed to worsening the situation with their choices, and they aided in deeply sabotaging (if not destroying) the country in the process.

"You can't support Harris without supporting genocide" was right-wing propagandist bullshit the entire time, and it's deeply saddening that so many people couldn't see the forest for the trees. Most of them are probably still feeling smug about it while ignoring the blood on their hands.