494

The poll found 50% of Democrats approve of how Biden has navigated the conflict while 46% disapprove — and the two groups diverge substantially in their views of U.S. support for Israel. Biden’s support on the issue among Democrats is down slightly from August, as an AP-NORC poll conducted then found that 57% of Democrats approved of his handling of the conflict and 40% disapproved.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

I'm sorry I wasn't aware that Hamas is using infants?

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 4 points 7 months ago

No, but the did kill a lot of them intentionally and have stated their goal is to do so again and again until all the Jews are dead.

[-] xerazal@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago

You know, Israel could single handedly dismantle Hamas non violently by accepting a two state solution where the two sides work together for mutual benefit.

Just saying, hamas has whatever support it has purely as a resistance movement against Israel for their apartheid regime. Their support would fizzle away if Israel were to do the right thing and try to actually improve the material well-being of the Palestinian population and give them the freedom and state they've wanted.

The problem is, right now what Israel is doing is only going to hurt them in the long run, not help them. The ideology of Hamas is that, an ideology. You can't kill an idea with bombs, that only makes it stronger. And Israel is only digging their own grave by constantly killing civilians at this level, because every Middle Eastern Nation around will never try to work with them again and probably start warring with Israel again, and I'm sorry but Israel isn't gonna survive that. They were so close to finally getting some sort of peace agreement with Saudi Arabia, and now that's nothing but a pipe dream again.

[-] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Weren't they on the cusp of a two state solution before Arafat pulled out?

[-] xerazal@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 months ago

Yea.

https://www.npr.org/2023/10/19/1207243717/23-years-ago-israelis-and-palestinians-were-talking-about-a-two-state-solution

Arafat's negotiators on the Palestinian side were serious about wanting a two state solution and wanted to come up with a deal with the Israelis, but something stopped Arafat from going through with it. He told clinton he didn't want to give up Jerusalem as it's a holy site to muslims (it is for Jews and Christians too, so ngl I don't think anyone wants to not have Jerusalem. But that's Arafat, not all Palestinians. Yes that was their leader, but yk not every leader has unanimous support from the people.

[-] roboticide@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

He basically was willing to discuss all the areas where the Israelis were making concessions. He wasn't willing to discuss any of the areas where the Palestinians were supposed to make concessions. So it seemed like he had just said no.

But what I subsequently learned - about 18 months ago, I had a dinner with a former Palestinian negotiator who'd been part of the delegation. He said the whole Palestinian delegation had decided among themselves they should accept it. They went back to Arafat, and Arafat said no. I subsequently heard from another Palestinian on that delegation who said Arafat thought he could still do a better deal under Bush because he thought maybe Bush will be even more forthcoming.

Holy shit, so Arafat alone basically blew the best chance we had.

Jerusalem should just be made a UN protectorate or independent third city-state at this point as part of a two-state solution (like the Vatican).

And yeah, I know everyone will hate that idea, but hey, at least then everyone will hate the idea.

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 points 7 months ago

You know, Israel could single handedly dismantle Hamas non violently by accepting a two state solution where the two sides work together for mutual benefit.

That's news to Hamas.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

No, until Israel goes away. Israel != Jews.

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 7 months ago

It's ironic there's a commentary right above you arguing that Israel could get Peace by simply offering a two-state solution we're both States exist.

At this point if Israel goes away it be genocide. There's whole generations of people that were born and raised in Israel. There's really nowhere for those people to flee to where they'd be safe other than maybe the US.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

The country is not the people. Saying you want the country gone is entirely different.

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 1 points 7 months ago

Without the country who will protect the people who live there?

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Whatever government is put in place after. Exactly the same as every other post colonial region.

[-] mwguy@infosec.pub 0 points 7 months ago

Specifically who?

this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
494 points (91.9% liked)

politics

18073 readers
2921 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS