politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
What else could be inferred from what you said
Quite a bit. Like, using centuries old conflicts as justification for contemporary wars is sick, and even less meaningful when the majority of those who this justification would be applied to have absolutely no history that ties them to the supposed historical events.
On the other hand, the people who started the Gaza genocide, are not only still alive, many of them are still in positions of power, and still actively engaging in furthering and perpetuating the genocidal project of the Israelis.
So, if, by your logic, Jewish Israelis, who the vast majority of which have no ethnic or cultural ties to Palestine, can use 15 century old conflicts as the basis for modern day genocide, then why can’t contemporary Palestinians, who can put a face and name to those actively engaging in genocide against them, fight back? Why is it always framed as if Palestine attacking Israel is an act of aggression, while the wholesale oppression and systematic murder of Palestinians is never seen as such? The Al-Aqsa Flood was a desperate measure by an oppressed group in the fact of escalating violence against them. Hundreds or thousands of Palestinians are extrajudicially killed every year, thousands arrested and held for months or years without trial. Thousands dispossessed of their homes every year. It is definitively an act of defense to attack those perpetuating these violent abuses upon them.
Isn’t your logic then that if Israel doesn’t stop then they will rightfully own the area because there won’t be any descendants of the people they killed?
As per my original point, if you ignore the other side then it’s easy to see yourself as right
And as you can see by the people replying to me, they have no clue about the other side of it
Don’t try to “both sides” me
If you have any understanding of “last time they killed us they eradicated us” then you might understand why Israel is acting the way they are
And you’ll get people chanting to get rid of Israel/extend Palestine to the sea
Of course Israel is going to be fighting for their lives
It’s fine if you want that but don’t blame the other side for thinking you want that and don’t pretend to be leftist if you aren’t looking for a joint solution
As for anyone dumb enough to say “they have no choice but terrorism/violence” that is only justified when you want to eliminate the other side
We don’t blow up pipelines or execute billionaires in hopes of a compromise, we do it in hopes to get rid of them