Harris calls for ceasefire in Gaza, two state solution

[Didymus 34,380]

24 minutes ago, PartySick said:

She literally told the dude to his face that the deaths he's caused are inexcusable and the only path forward is a ceasefire. It's worth taking the gamble that her moving farther and farther into decrying Netanyahu's killing spree will translate into policy and ever increasing pressure on Israel to stop what they're doing before they cause irreparable harm to their alliance with the States.

Especially when the only other possibile outcome is for the office to go to the guy that wants to literally nuke the place.

Calling her a fraud does nothing but make the people who care about this issue unmotivated, making them feel as though voting isn't important in this election, and making it all the more likely that Trump wins.

Palestinians will not care about leftists' purity tests when nukes are obliterating the entire Gaza Strip and Israel has the US' enthusiastic blessing to annex it and the West Bank, or when the two countries go to war with Iran, which Trump recently said should "be wiped off the face of the Earth".

A marginal improvement is always better than a total regression and failure.

 

30 minutes ago, Ladle Ghoulash said:

In what world would basically any Vice president or sitting president ever say that? lmao. Like I fundamentally agree with you, but one President alone isn’t going to rewrite 75 years of US foreign policy. Also: I was specifically addressing the *rhetorical* claim that what she had said was contradictory, not whether what she said was addressing the issue to the fullest extent necessary, so I’d appreciate you not unloading as if I was attempting to justify US foreign policy re:Israel. I was simply asking, “Realistically, at this point in time, what do you expect her to say?” 

I get it and I see the other side of the coin too. Praising Harris for doing the bare minimum/not even that will also unmotivate people who have been hesitant to condemn Israel/support Palestine from taking a firmer stand. Goes for other issues as well.

Again, we've seen this with Obama too. He was actually worsening the military situation in Iraq and Syria and no one even noticed because his personality was so reassuring. So yes, it is a gamble. But if people's vigilance and scrutiny drops because they're all comfy with the typical promises-but-no-delivery Democratic "charm" the Americans will have been played, again.

Yes, a marginal improvement is better but then let's call it that instead of suggesting that she's worthy of "stanning" like this site is embarrassingly intent on doing. We can be happy there's marginal improvement and still demand more. Why not demand the dismantling of the two-party system while we're at it? All these things are possible if people aren't swayed by a high sensation campaign after which their political interest drops to the bare minimum.

So I'm frustrated and scared, sorry if that seems to spill into unwarranted negativity towards you or members here. I just hate seeing this happen over and over and ****ing over again.

[River 129,127]

I'm not so happy that she spoke with him, but this is the politics game and sometimes you have no choice but to meet the people you don't like.

I just had enough of the rhetoric that "Israel has the right to defend itself" hmm no, the Palestinians should have the right to defend themselves from Israel, Israel is the aggressor.

[alsemanche 97,855]

Israel does not, in fact, have the right to defend itself. There's no 'defense' in the first place. Israel is the aggressor and has been since its genesis so this statement is bullshit, and so is the idea of a two-state solution because that's not really a solution, it simply allows Israel to continue existing as a colonial state and allows it to attempt more expansion in the future. 

Is her statement better than some other politicians like Trump? Sure, but doesn't make her or a statement 'good'. 

[River 129,127]

7 minutes ago, alsemanche said:

Israel does not, in fact, have the right to defend itself. There's no 'defense' in the first place. Israel is the aggressor and has been since its genesis so this statement is bullshit, and so is the idea of a two-state solution because that's not really a solution, it simply allows Israel to continue existing as a colonial state and allows it to attempt more expansion in the future. 

Is her statement better than some other politicians like Trump? Sure, but doesn't make her or a statement 'good'. 

funny thing is that Israel is complaining about her statement and says that it's pro Palestinian

The source of the problem is just there that even thinking about a Palestinian State is a "anti Israel" to them.

[Sunny 12,758]

America(n presidents) will always support Israel cause Israel is an American colony, but as far as it goes this is a way better response than what Trump would've done

[Bronco 28,242]

1 hour ago, River said:

funny thing is that Israel is complaining about her statement and says that it's pro Palestinian

The source of the problem is just there that even thinking about a Palestinian State is a "anti Israel" to them.

I mean I think this is proof that her statement works in what it's clearly intended to do. 
Speak to the people wavering in the middle. 

The poles of the debate and the people at them aren't moving. If you've got them they're staying, if you haven't you ain't getting them. But there's a lot of swing voters in the middle who's primary thought on Israel v Palestine is a simple "stop the current violence" and she's speaking to them and saying exactly what they want to hear. 

[faysalaaa 5,382]

16 hours ago, PartySick said:

She literally told the dude to his face that the deaths he's caused are inexcusable and the only path forward is a ceasefire. It's worth taking the gamble that her moving farther and farther into decrying Netanyahu's killing spree will translate into policy and ever increasing pressure on Israel to stop what they're doing before they cause irreparable harm to their alliance with the States.

Especially when the only other possibile outcome is for the office to go to the guy that wants to literally nuke the place.

Calling her a fraud does nothing but make the people who care about this issue unmotivated, making them feel as though voting isn't important in this election, and making it all the more likely that Trump wins.

Palestinians will not care about leftists' purity tests when nukes are obliterating the entire Gaza Strip and Israel has the US' enthusiastic blessing to annex it and the West Bank, or when the two countries go to war with Iran, which Trump recently said should "be wiped off the face of the Earth".

A marginal improvement is always better than a total regression and failure.

If we are gonna take politicians on their words, Trump has also attacked and exposed Netanyahu more than anyone.

https://x.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1816192687491444765/video/1

I think the American system (No matter who is in charge) will be in full support of Israel, unless there is a president thats willing to go after its own government and the whole system. Trump is the only one willing to do that, but hes only willing to do it to benefit himself.