this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2023
74 points (90.2% liked)

politics

25359 readers
2050 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
 

Brett McGurk has sought to put a Saudi-Israeli relationship "at the forefront" of the U.S.'s Middle East policy — downplaying Palestinian concerns and human rights.

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Honestly it just sounds like this guy is perpetuating US foreign policy in the Middle East as it pertains to Israel and fostering an alliance between Israel and the Saudis. This is the same type of thing Kushner was trying to accomplish under Trump, and was cited in the article as being a Bush era policy as well, possibly going back even further. So it's just the same old same old song and dance.

So that doesn't seem to be so controversial, however the fact that both Israel and the Saudis and their allies are trying to influence US elections and corporations while fostering relationships with our enemies and traitors in the US should be pretty concerning and should have initiated a change of strategy, as they say on the streets "these hoes ain't loyal".

[–] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Also, there's the whole "enabling at least two seperate genocides by making up excuses for, providing weapons for and bankrolling some of the world's worst war criminals" aspect.

Fewer and fewer people are ignoring that tiny detail.

[–] DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You're talking about Russia right? That's usually their thing. Not even sure who you're trying to blame for what without more details, but there are no clean hands when it comes to history and geopolitics, everyone has a history of slaughter at some point, doesn't mean we should excuse it, but we should exercise critical thinking to understand the nuances in the contextual differences.

Social media, it brings us together, for better or worse.

[–] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 2 points 2 years ago

You're talking about Russia right?

Yeah, I'm talking about the US helping Russia 🙄 Pack away the whataboutisms, please.

That's usually their thing

Also the thing of Israel in Palestine and Saudi Arabia in Yemen, both of which the US are providing cover and material aid for.

there are no clean hands when it comes to history and geopolitics

There are some much bloodier than others, though. Other countries sometimes doing bad things doesn't excuse anything, least of all crimes against humanity and the facilitation thereof.

everyone has a history of slaughter at some point

First of all, that's not true. Second of all, only a few countries have a PRESENT of genocide and other crimes against humanity.

doesn't mean we should excuse it

First sensible thing you've said.

but we should exercise critical thinking to understand the nuances in the contextual differences.

Aaand there you go excusing it. Again. 🤦

Social media, it brings us together, for better or worse.

Wtf does that have to do with anything??

[–] RainfallSonata@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

These are the sorts of men that should be all over the news. This is where the media should put it's focus. How many others just like him have similar influence in other policy areas?

[–] VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf 3 points 2 years ago

How many others just like him have similar influence in other policy areas?

Frustratingly and terrifyingly many, I bet.

[–] GuyDudeman@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

McGurk the Smirk is what we call him.

image

[–] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 1 points 2 years ago

Smirkin' McGurkin'

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

Looks like a Jerk- and not just because it rhymes

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

He’s doing a terrible job