• krashmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    18 days ago

    And yet accelerated genocide is the option that was chosen.

    Look, I get the argument you’re making. The problem is that it hinges entirely on accepting a premise that isn’t based in reality. Progress, specifically as it relates to harm reduction, doesn’t happen instantaneously. It never has. You take the wins you can get and then push for the next step. You can be mad about that, and I would argue that we all should be, but it’s not going to change the way things work. In this case you’ve let idealism get in the way of actual tangible improvement. Even if you disagree with that characterization you can’t dispute the fact that you’ve at least helped shut the door on the potential for improvement. If you can find a way to rationalize that in your head to make you feel like the good guy then I understand why you would want to take that path, but do you honestly believe the people of Gaza take solace in the fact that you had good intentions? I’d wager they don’t give a shit how you frame this in your mind. They’re just thinking about what a Trump presidency means for the future of this conflict and that isn’t good by any stretch of the imagination.

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      18 days ago

      This is deranged. Progress? Improvement? What did Kamala say she would do differently? Did she say she’d stop sending weapons and financial assistance?

      • aesthelete@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        Netanyahu was filibustering the peace process hoping for Trump to win while he ran out the clock. If he, like Putin, were forced to deal with Harris instead of Trump over the next four years his attitude would’ve changed after the results were announced.

        • blazera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          18 days ago

          Filibuster? Man that asshole doesnt have a filibuster, he has absolutely zero authority over whether or not we send him weapons and financial assistance.

          Why would his attitude have to change with Harris vs his current attitude with Biden? Did she say she was gonna stop sending weapons and money? She was pretty adamant about being a continuation of Biden as far as I saw

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            18 days ago

            Why would his attitude have to change with Harris vs his current attitude with Biden?

            Because Biden and Harris and various other Democrats wanted peace and were genuinely concerned about the people in the region caught up in the conflict. Trump gives absolutely no shits about any of it and neither do Republicans who will allocate the funds because that’s how our government works.

            • blazera@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              18 days ago

              Because Biden and Harris and various other Democrats wanted peace and were genuinely concerned about the people in the region caught up in the conflict.

              Oh they were sending the genocidal nation a ridiculous amount of bombs and missiles for peace. Makes sense.

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        Even if you disagree with that characterization you can’t dispute the fact that you’ve at least helped shut the door on the potential for improvement.

        • blazera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          What did Kamala say she would do differently? You cant keep talking about progress and improvement without any signs of either. The only potential for improvement we have is a progressive candidate

          • krashmo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            17 days ago

            I believe she would have been marginally better than Biden but, as you continuously refuse to acknowledge because it completely defeats the point you are trying to make, that is not what we’re discussing here. Trump is indisputably going to be worse than either of them and that’s what you have chosen to support through inaction. You can talk in circles around that fact as much as you like but it won’t change reality.

            • blazera@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              17 days ago

              You were the one that brought up progress and improvement. But those words have meanings, and its not keeping things the same. Things are currently unacceptable for a lot of people, and everyone here told them to hush up about demanding better. And so they hushed up and stayed home.