this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
24 points (80.0% liked)

politics

25161 readers
3094 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
24
"Squad" comments on Hamas reignite Dems’ Israel tensions (www.axios.com)
submitted 2 years ago by lettruthout@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

To the dismay of some of their Democratic colleagues, Squad members' reactions to Hamas' attack included decrying the "cycle of violence" between Israelis and Palestinians and demanding an end to U.S. military assistance to Israel.

all 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 29 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I remember when W. Bush invaded Iraq and one of his justifications was that they were in violation of something like 17 or 18 UN Resolutions.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect2.html

Problem: At the same time, Israel was in direct violation of close to 80 UN resolutions. Human rights violations, illegal settlements, basically attempting to crush and exterminate the Palestinian people. There would have been more except the US has veto power.

Since 2015, the UN adopted an ADDITIONAL 140 resolutions against Israel.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-condemned-israel-more-than-all-other-countries-combined-in-2022-monitor/

If this were any other country in the world there would be sanctions to direct military intervention.

Oh, it's Israel? Nah, fam, give them $3 billion a year... they need it.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I just want healthcare

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah wouldn't it be tight if billions of dollars in foreign aid didn't go to support any of this nonsense and instead went back to the people it was taken from in some tangible way?

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It would also boost the economy and increase wages.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah, I’m increasingly of the position that the most reasonable solution is to end aid and offer voluntary dissolution of Israel. If a joint Palestinian state akin to modern South Africa is wanted that’s cool. If it’s better to just import Israelis to the nation they went there from that’s fine too. When Israel sees this as a “do war crimes or your family dies” they do war crimes.

Apartheid states have ended. Sometimes it went poorly like in the United States and South Africa, sometimes it went so much worse like in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe. But we can’t keep propping this state up and supplying them with weapons.

[–] paintbucketholder@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If it’s better to just import Israelis to the nation they went there from that’s fine too.

Israel is full of people who were born there, who have never lived anywhere else, and - as the recent anti-Netanyahu protests have shown - want their nation to be a free, open, democratic society.

I don't see how deporting them to a county they've never even been to and giving their land to somebody else is any different than what was done to Palestinians in the creation of the state of Israel.

I would prefer solutions to look at the current status, as it exists today, and seek a solution that minimizes suffering for everyone involved - regardless of the history of how we arrived at this situation, and certainly without using that history to justify even more suffering.

This is not a pro-Isreal or pro-Palestinian position, by the way.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

True, and one answer would be expedited citizenship for any Israeli willing to cede their Israeli citizenship. But there’s a certain hypocrisy in saying that with that as an American where it’d be taking people from one settler colonial nation to another. And leaving the Palestinians with a lot of rubble that once was infrastructure isn’t great either. Offering Palestinians refugee to citizen pathways as well may also help.

And yeah I do believe that there are quite a few Israelis who want a shared secular state. That state is what I believe to be the ideal path to peace. But it isn’t my land or my conflict. I’m just someone from the country that keeps arming one side and helped raise and radicalize Netanyahu. My scope is more in line with what my country can do without causing problems

[–] DoomBot5@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The UN has a super hard on for Israel. It's a pathetic joke at this point. 95% of what Israel is condemned for in the UN is actually done in other Middle Eastern countries to a much worse degree (or potentially not done at all in Israel vs those countries), yet no condemnations are ever brought against them. Hell, North Korea is mentioned less than Israel.

If you want Israel to ever take any of these resolutions seriously, don't make a fucking joke of the process.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

to be fair we shouldn't be supplying arms to saudi arabia either

[–] atetulo@lemm.ee 14 points 2 years ago

and demanding an end to U.S. military assistance to Israel.

Hear hear!

[–] neptune@dmv.social 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Democrats in disarray! Again! 😱

If republicans had policy debates maybe they could get inane headlines like this too

[–] lettruthout@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

And boy does this issue need debate. Why again is the US supporting this nonsense?

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 years ago

A combination of strong lobbying by Zionists combined with a little good old fashioned racism.

[–] atetulo@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

Because the US government does not serve its citizens.