this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2024
111 points (89.9% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4201 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
 

"Would the U.S. respond?" ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce asked repeatedly as the president walked away after the end of an unrelated event. He paused, thought for a moment and then returned to the lectern.

"We are devoted to the defense of Israel. We will support Israel. We will help defend Israel and Iran will not succeed," he said.

According to one U.S. defense official, the assets being moved to the region include both "ships and aircraft."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

There are two major issues here:

  • Israel is a U.S. ally. The United States doesn't just abandon its allies (Republican/Russian recalcitrance regarding Ukraine notwithstanding).
  • Israel's current government is being run by a right-wing asshole who decided the appropriate response to Hamas' barbaric attack was to turn barbarism up to 11, with predictable calamitous results for the entire region.

Joe Biden's diplomatic job is to try to prevent things from descending into a full-scale regional war, try to protect Gaza civilians, try to reduce tensions, try to keep Israel as an ally... Notice how some of those have come into contradiction with each other? Yeah. He's trying to thread a very difficult needle.

I'm not saying he's succeeding, either, but he's at least trying.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 20 points 6 months ago (2 children)

The US doesn't arbitrarily choose to make and keep allies. Israel represents a huge geopolitical strategic advantage in the region, given its position on the Mediterranean and its proximity to trade routes and oil pipelines. They're willing to put up with an ally committing genocide not just on principle but because they don't actually care about that as much as their own power in the region.

Israel's current government

80% of Israelis support the war in Gaza. Netanyahu is a convenient fall guy to what is a PR nightmare (and nothing more). If tomorrow they vote in a new government, nothing fundamentally changes for Palestinians, except perhaps fewer bombs drop on their heads. They face genocide through Israel's blockade and remain in an apartheid state.

The US has geopolitical interests in the region: that didn't change when Israel went full genocide.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I tried to find backing for that 80% statistic you cited, and couldn't. Could you provide a link? I'd also be interested in the details of how that support breaks down. Is that 80% fully in support of the genocide in Gaza? Or is that 80% support destroying Hamas, while the particulars of the war are much more varied in their support?

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't disagree but we should be careful with polls. This 80% pole is being spammed everywhere now. If you think back after 9/11 support for the Iraq invasion was high initially then it tapered off. I'm just saying: polls aren't indicative of a sharp picture. I take them as a pulse of the people at a snapshot in time.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Israel was founded on a zionist mission, which has always been in contradiction with the existence and independence of the Palestinian people. I'm not sure I see a reason to doubt a poll showing support for a war against Palestine, except possibly a poll that shows support for the means of that war, but then again that's the US's stance too: they support the war, but disagree with the optics and methods used.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

So what? And America was founded on manifest destiny. It doesn't mean Americans born today want to wipe out the native Americans. We can't ascribe the sins of our grandfathers to our children. A great deal of Israeli people were actively against settlements and for a two state solution before Oct 7. This is a fact that has to be contended with and can't be ignored.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

America already did wipe out the Native Americans

Try saying this back when western expansion was still happening.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You're missing the point of my comment because you're fixated on the suffering and expansion. I'll repeat myself in case it wasn't clear: we cannot ascribe the sins of the grandfathers to the children. A big percentage of Israeli population already vehemently opposes settlements and expansion.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm fixated on the suffering and expansion because it's currently happening

I'm not ascribing the sins of a past generation onto a new one, I'm pointing to the sins of the current generation

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ok. You're getting lost in the sauce and you're doing it on purpose at this point. In talking about the significant contingent of Israeli people that oppose settlements.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What is the point of opposing settlements when what little territory Palestinians have is being actively occupied and being subjected to an apartheid regime?

The majority of Israelis support the continuation of that situation, and a third support the annexation of occupied territory under Israeli rule.

Opposition to settlements is a little impotent when their government is actively undermining the security of Palestinians behind a blockade. I don't get the relevance.

[–] TheFonz@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Bro whatever I don't care. I just commented on the validity of polls, then you pivoted to the Zionist mission and now were back to quoting polls full circle. Whatever you say man. Im talking to the wind. Idgaf any more.

[–] archomrade@midwest.social 0 points 6 months ago
[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works -1 points 6 months ago

Technically America was founded on proto-manifest destiny, fuck britain, and keeping the thirteen colonies from killing eachother and being reconquered