There will be no peace in the Middle East under Trump, either
There will be no peace in the Middle East under Trump, either
The false notion that Trump oversaw a bloodless era of peace in the Middle East reveals a disturbing collective amnesia.
You're viewing a single thread.
Well, when neither candidates have meaningful differences on the issue you care the most about, there’s no meaningful reason to vote - that’s what caused the major vote collapse at the election.
Here's a meaningful difference:
Harris supported a two-state solution with the eventual goal of an independent Palestine.
Trump will oversee the formal annexation of Gaza and the
West Bank"Judea and Samara", marking the end of any hope for a future Palestinian state.What a tool
You murdered Palestinians. I hope you're happy with your support of Trump's genocide.
Maybe what people who didn't vote and Trump voters wanted was a merciful yet very quick complete annihilation to Palestine, before summer comes. Yeah, it must have been this.
This argument is no different than the gaslighting corporations do when they tell people that saving the environment is the job of consumers. The people killing Palestinians are the Israelis, with the full support and endorsement of both the democrats and republicans. No voter is responsible for that. Voting Kamala would have no difference on the outcome, she publicly announced her full support for Israel continuing their genocide on multiple occasions.
And don’t give me that “Trump will kill them faster” bullshit. That argument is the stupidest you lot have ever made, and that’s saying a lot. You should be dropped in Gaza to try arguing it to the starving kids missing arms and legs.
“Oh, sorry, but I voted for the person who would kill you slower, so there’s nothing I can do!”
Either vote murdered Palestinians. What are you talking about?
One candidate promised to murder more and that does make a difference.
Must feel great only killing a few kids, huh?
If you had the power to save only one life would you take it, or let them die because you don't like your options?
You aren't as morally pure as you think. We have to do what we can with what we have.
Now they're all going to die.
Let's put this a different way. You were given the choice of saving only one of two children from a burning building, and actively chose to let both of them burn to death, because you couldn't save both.
Real superhero Karen energy, right there.
That's not how this works. That's called "justification". I voted for Kamala, BTW.
I really do believe now that the Democrats are encouraging the worst, dumbest, insane opponents hoping that they'll find one that will finally push people to vote Democrat EVEN THOUGH they offer nothing.
Democrats have been neoliberals since the time of the first Clinton campaign. The milquetoast candidates are a direct result of that.
If you voted, then I'll recind the analogy towards you. The 15 million democratic voters in 2020 that stayed home for whatever reason in 2024, still did exactly what I just portrayed. They had a choice to make, and they made the choice to do nothing, because things aren't perfect.
And I believe that the extra 15M votes in 2020 were an outlier (probably because of COVID) and we can't expect to see that kind of turnout again. Not unless something incredible happens.
And Kamala was not incredible.
Your argument is insane. For example, I would never, ever, ever expect a Jewish person to vote for a politician who is exterminating Jewish children, even if I could make a rational argument that their opponent is worse for Jewish people.
You need to contend with fundamental human nature and you need to recognize that the Democratic Party for the past 13 months has acted beyond the moral pale. They have violated the red moral lines drawn by the world since 1945 and have done so with pride and sometimes caprice.
Being petulant towards people who could not bring themselves to vote for a genocidaire, and treating their very human revulsion and horror as petulance, marks you as an untrustworthy person who is unserious about human rights or liberal values.
You may be surprised to learn that Bibi wasn't on any ballots anywhere in the US.
You did have the option of voting for Harris who wants to pressure Israel into a cease fire or trump who wants Israel to finish off the Palestinians faster.
So, like the other guy already said, if you didn't vote for the one option who wanted to rein in the murder and also had a chance of getting more than 1% of the vote, you're an "untrustworthy person who is unserious about human rights or liberal values."
You may be surprised to learn that Bibi wasn't on any ballots anywhere in the US.
Record breaking ovations and applause for him in Congress, so why should I care?
Harris who wants to pressure Israel into a cease fire
So you're either a liar or a moron, huh.
So when faced with a trolley problem, always just let it do whatever
Likening to an abstract hypothetical moral problem is very appropriate to the way you people think. At the end of the day politics for you is a lever you pull every few years and the catharsis or disappointment involved.
By the way, kindly save your "I told you so" and "trolley problem" bullshit for after Trump has allowed Israel to slaughter a larger number of children than Biden did for the past 13 months.
kindly save your “I told you so” and “trolley problem” bullshit for after Trump has allowed Israel to slaughter a larger number of children than Biden did for the past 13 months.
Why wait? What happens then, you wave a magic wand and all of a sudden it's rainbows and lollipops?
What happens then is that I will be responding to a moral argument based in facts, and not a fucking hypothetical that may as well be an excuse for genocide. If in 13 months the Trump administration has aided Israel in the slaughter of another 100,000 children, we can start talking about how voting Democrats as "damage mitigation" is a duty to humanity. Until then I will try my best to assume you're making the argument in good faith and that you truly believe that ending genocide is a moral priority.
Lol Trump was extremely happy to take part in the SuperGenocide in Yemen. If you think Biden's aid for the Gaza attack is bad, you ain't seen nothing yet.
Trump was also perfectly happy to use COVID against Americans who didn't support him when it was primarily in places with high population density.
Anyone who thinks he'll be better for Gaza is a god damned moron.
Not just a genocide, but a SuperGenocide! Wow!
One that began under Obama-Biden. The US played a similar but far limited role in the starvation of Yemen. It did not veto any UN resolutions, threaten the ICC or the ICJ, invite Bin Salman for unprecedented, record-breaking applause and ovations at Congress.
A nation-wide civil war that has raged for nearly ten years and where numerous sides are responsible for the death count. I should know, because I spent many nights in 2018-2019 with my Hadhrami friends discussing this war, joined their call-ins with Yemeni politicians and civil activists. I heard them complain about who they know died and who killed them.
And yet you sit here and tell me "buckle up, if you didn't like Biden working overtime to slaughter 100,000 children within a year", followed by hypotheticals. Stop telling me what may happen just because you cannot defend what has happened.
far limited role
Lol. They were not only supplying them the bombs, they were refueling the bombers in flight and even bombing by themselves. If you already agree the US is culpable for the deaths in Gaza, imagine how you'll feel if Trump adds those two ingredients to the party once more
Id counter that and say if you didn't vote you would be "unserious" about human rights
The only people who voted for the genocidaire I would consider to be engaging in serious harm mitigation are those who also use every other means afforded to them to stop the genocide. As for the people who have little to say about the fact that they have been presented two genocidaires as presidents - and even less to do - you're even more grotesque when you invoke human rights.