1553
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] silverlose@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I think you can make a strong case that the US foreign policy in this region is garbage, and I agree with you, they’ve done terrible things.

But I still don’t think that they would openly support genocide. If they had, I think you would’ve been able to find a source for that.

Just so you don’t get the wrong idea here: I agree with what you’re saying but I disagree with the language you’re using. I think it undermines your point.

[-] bishbosh@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

If you openly support, both verbally and functionally, an on-going genocide, you openly support genocide.

Just because they didn't say "We want to genocide the Palestinians." at a press meeting, doesn't mean that they don't openly support the genocide they were funding, blocking criticism for, and suppressing protest of.

[-] silverlose@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Eh, I think id call it covert or something like that. Saying “openly” implies they like/enjoy genocide or something.

[-] bishbosh@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I guess at a point we have to ask what is the purpose of drawing that line. If China says it's begrudgingly purging the Uyghurs due to their cultural beliefs and the land they ingenious to, are they not openly supporting genocide? Does it matter if they say they like it in press briefings when the only actions they take is to further violence and propagate the ongoing genocide?

Why is the hypothetical cruelty in their soul the deciding factor, when they are opening doing the work that supports a genocide?

[-] silverlose@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

It’s worth something that they at least try to lie about it, no? Like we’re not really at “openly” yet.

I’m just making a point about the language used to try to help you be more convincing. When you say stuff like the dems openly support genocide, I imagine a clip of Biden gleefully cheering on the deaths of innocents.

I get it’s semantics, and you’re correct in a way it is “openly” supporting that, but it just sounds a bit hyperbolic to me.

Don’t forget, we ultimately agree.

[-] bishbosh@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I understand and respect optics arguments, but I think this is why I don't know that we agree to the degree you think we do.

It seems that you think we should be cautious of the optics of unjustly invoking phasing that you don't feel is justified for the democratic party. To put it a bit more plainly it seems that you are quicker to try and reframe it in such a way that the criticism is not applicable for democrats. To me it seems utterly vital that we use language that is both true and harsh. Openly means without the secret channels governments often use, and nothing about the dems support of Israel is obtuse.

I think this is vital because I don't think we can let slip the genocidal support of the previous administration be forgotten in the haze of the terrors of the current one.

The democratic party is a vicious and evil group that in the face of massive mounting evidence, continued to defend, and fund an on going genocide. In an age of perpetual wars and bombings, our 'progressive' party claimed they would ensure we would have "the most lethal military in the world."

I don't want to shy away from this because I think they are blood thirsty people, and should be portrayed as such, especially when it's literally true.

[-] silverlose@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

If you imagine (fantasize, really) about a pragmatic person with liberal ideas, what party would they join? I think Democrat. I just don’t want to classify all those people as evil.

Clearly we disagree on somethings but the important things are:

  • genocide, bad
  • democratic Party, not great (at least)

That’s a fair point, and I accept your argument. Honestly, I’ll think on it more.

[-] bishbosh@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

My point isn't so much about the party they should 'join'. I know we are having this conversation in the context of a country that largely aware of the different parties and broadly what they feel about them. Be seeing as this a time of necessary reflection for the democratic party, and in turn reflection for their base, I think it's worth looking harshly at what they really were before the currently administration. That a party that was offered as pro-worker, anti-war, pro-immigration, pro-trans issues, has become a party of, 'strike breaking', 'most lethal military', 'tough on illegals', and 'following the law'.

I think it's valid to classify many in the party as evil because they are either doing evil or capitulating to it, and we need to have a conversation about how much about them needs to change.

[-] silverlose@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Fair enough.

Full disclosure: I’m not American.

[-] bishbosh@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Good to know, I am sorry our politics are such a fucking problem for everyone!

[-] silverlose@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Hopefully, us rational people will get through this! Hope you have a nice day!

[-] bishbosh@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago
[-] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Biden said he knew Israel was carpet bombing Gaza.

this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
1553 points (95.3% liked)

Microblog Memes

12155 readers
1220 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

RULES:

  1. Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
  2. Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
  3. You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
  4. Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
  5. Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
  6. Absolutely no NSFL content.
  7. Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
  8. No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.

RELATED COMMUNITIES:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS