bumphot

I don't think anyone is funding anything on lemmy, we are too small of a userbase. And in other media, I am sure that every politician who has an interest will use any oprotunity for their advantage, however we shouldn't forget the fact that this is actually the case. Biden is actually sidesteping congress to send support to Israel, in fact, without it, Israel would have no chance in actually doing it. US government is fully funding this genocide.

Irony in this comment. A lot of people claiming all antiBiden sentiment is Russian propaganda and this guy is also mistaken thinking this is Biden cabinet supporting him and not just regular people who are falling for politicians PR.

At some point you will have to accept the reality that people simply disagree with you and that it is not some kind of Kremlin propaganda. Biden and Trump and Hamas and Netanyahu are all bad and they all help each other in order to have someone to fight against in public to justify their position in power. You are falling for government propaganda yourself, google Netanyahy supporting Hamas or Hilary supporting Trump and you can figure it out by yourself. You are literally falling for their plan they bragged about themselves or was leaked in their emails with cryptographic proof. They are making you a fool for their games.

No, he is supporting his own interests, like every other politician. It is not a Russian narrative, it is a well documented fact. Netanyahu is the one that is funding Hamas, so he can justify his actions. Just like Hilary made Trump a Republican candidate, so they would have an easier win. Or why US government has a long history of arming the terrorists in Middle East, just so they can justify a war afterwards. Iran is a great example of this.

Almost anyone would be a better candidate then those two. I think if you take a random American and place them as candidate, they would be a better president. It really says something to have a system that selects the worst possible people in power.

They don't mean anything if he loses either. I don't think Democrates will let Trump not be a Republican nominee, it would be harder for them to win elections if they have someone more sane as competition. This is why Hilary's campaign supported Trump and why Trump is there in the first place, so they can win more easily.

We shouldn't feel so easily defeated. We can make things better, being passive is what makes it easier for those in power to make it worse. We can make things a lot better, we don't need to be ok with genocide so that some idiot that Democrates funded to be Republican candidate doesn't win. I just kinda feel like their plan to make us submissive actually worked.

To be honest, this is not just conservatives.

witnessing a genocide

*funding the genocide

In fact they are not only purposely funding the genocide, they are actively ignoring majority of people against it, even surpassing the senate just to be sure they can send the money to Israel quickly

Actually since TikTok is where most of the popular support for Palestine is from and probably why after decades of this genocide it finally became well-known, they are trying to shut it down, since China won't censor it for them. Classic fascist moves from the government.

They are not forced legally but practically indirectly. It is as voluntary as someone agreeing to landlords terms or those of your employer. Legally speaking, yes no one is forcing you, practically speaking you don't really have a choice and such a system was created on purpose so you can't have a choice. Once you start depending on US for their support in your defense, you need to scratch their back in doing an invasion or two so they keep supplying your weapons.

Then anyone can be a neighbor.

When you debate grammar it shows you have no good arguments. I don't always spell things correctly, because I am more focused on making sense, then appearance. If you understand what I mean, that is good enough for me. I understand that Russia and NATO are both problems and I understand that NATO is obviously far more powerful and bigger. I also understand what NATO claims to be, but I also see their presence in places where legally shouldn't be. Take Kosovo for example, by the UN it is not recognized as independent, legally it is part of Serbia and Serbia does not support NATO troops there. Legally speaking, that is an invasion. Practically NATO countries invade many Middle Eastern countries as well, they wear NATO hats when they speak of peace, but often (but not always) remove that hat when they invade other countries. You can either accept that both NATO and countries that invade Middle East are the same countries run by the same people with same interests and same goals, making it the same thing. Or you can pretend that only what is legally defined as separate is important, but then accept that legally NATO also sometimes invades countries and were never invaded themselves, making them more offensive then defensive. You can't have it both ways.