this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2024
516 points (94.8% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3061 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Yeah, both sides amiright?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LotrOrc@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Yes in this very specific case of genocide, both sides.

There were and are no restrictions from Biden/Harris. They did not stop any weapons or stop giving any money. Their 30 day deadline for food trucks passed and they did nothing. They've already given basically the maximum they could. The only difference in this specific case of genocide between the two is one won't apologize after doing it. They were both still going to do it

[–] femtech@midwest.social 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There are very literal restrictions with Biden.

[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml -3 points 15 hours ago

No there aren't. Biden even bypassed Congress to get them more weapons faster.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You could just read the article but here it is:

Currently, U.S. restrictions include an embargo on a certain weapons shipment and limitations on various combat-related equipment, even if they do not involve explosive ordnance. This embargo has impacted Israel’s defense capabilities, especially as the military now contends with active fronts in both Lebanon and Gaza, requiring strict control over ammunition and supply use.

[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml -4 points 15 hours ago

Name a "certain weapon" and how it is an enforced policy change.

I ask because I already know that there are no real restrictions, Israel has received constant deliveries of the weaoons it uses to commit this genocide.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh just nebulous things that could be anything. It's almost like the only restriction on military aid is stuff we don't give to anyone.

That reminds me of another Fox News hit, "The mobile WMD labs could be up here in the north, (generally waves hand over northern Iraq), or over here in the west, (tosses a finger towards the western deserts), or they could be hiding in baghdad, That's why we need to go in there and find them!"

Narrator: There were no mobile chemical weapon labs.

So I say again. Name one actual restriction. One thing Netanyahu has asked for and not gotten.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world -3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I literally did, from the article you’re commenting on but didn’t read.

Don’t try to move the goalposts hear.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

No you literally haven't. That's some speculative bullshit. I want what I asked for. One example of something that was denied to the Israelis. Not Fox News dithering about possibilities.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world -3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

It’s an example straight from the article.

You asked for one thing now you’re putting on other qualifiers.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

It's a quote from the article. It's not an example. It's the same as saying there are laws in the US that do things. It's the vaguest non answer possible.

[–] capital@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Why do people seem to believe all the pertinent information surrounding this issue is unclassified and available online?

You’d have to believe that to say shit like this.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The war crimes and laws about not sending military aid to war criminals are very public.

[–] capital@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

My comment is responding to the comment about restrictions.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

There's also the fact that Netanyahu has been very vocal anytime something was delayed even just logistically. I highly doubt we're providing any material that's super secret.

[–] capital@lemmy.world -1 points 19 hours ago

I’ll direct you to my first reply in this thread.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Trust us he's totally imposing restrictions behind the scenes,

[–] capital@lemmy.world 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not saying that so please stop putting words in my mouth.

I'm saying there's very likely lots we don't know. If you don't believe there's lots you don't know about this, I think you're ignorant.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 0 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

I’m saying there’s very likely lots we don’t know.

I see a man selling weapons that are being used in an ongoing genocide. I do not believe that something less dishonorable is going on in secret where there is even less public accountability.

[–] capital@lemmy.world 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

We're fully circular already. I'm done with this particular thread.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

You're expecting me to buy that Biden is better in secret on this issue than he is in public, but don't want to be called on it.