Her statement:
this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
151 points (81.9% liked)
politics
19170 readers
4529 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think it's kind of strange people think Harris wants to be associated with this Genocide. If it were that black-and-white, she clearly would've taken a harder position.
But if she does, then the larger Israeli-sympathetic Jewish voting bloc in PA that dwarfs the Muslim vote in Michigan (with less Electoral votes, mind you) gets jeopardized. If she doesn't toe the line, she loses, Trump wins, and Gazans are definitely fucked.
Like it's completely obvious why she has to have this position, lest she's immediately cast as antisemitic.
Well it's being actively used against the democrats. Bibi met with Trump and needed little encouragement to keep his genocide going till election day, to make the democrats look bad.
I agree but it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.
They're trying to negotiate a ceasefire; they're trying to get aid into Gaza.
The problem with withholding large amounts of aid is the antisemitic attack ads will have more bite, AIPAC as the most powerful lobbyist will go crazy, and there's a non-zero chance Bibi stages a false flag attack to paint Democrats as leaving them defenseless.
Polling indicates that she would certainly get significant gains in Michigan and Pennsylvania, along with all the other swing states. So I doubt polling is her reason for her stance on Israel and Conditional Military Aid
Quote
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Couple things:
The most substantive quote you have is a blatant editorializing by Zateo of the YouGov data. Nowhere does the polling datasay "withholding all aid." Conditioning Aid != Withholding Aid, which implies all aid. If we're going down this path, then Biden has already withheld some aid to Israel. And when he did, there was a massive backlash.
Moreover all of these studies are many months old and thus subject to drastic changes since the likes of May. Moreover they don't factor in the blow-back effect of withholding aid and the risk of there being a false flag on Israeli soil and how that would be portrayed against Democrats. Moreover it does not reflect the attack ads that would be used in battleground states with further bite by the GOP if Harris/Biden did this.
Further aid has also been conditioned on aid surges into Israel. Israel as expected is falling short half-way through the 30-day ultimatum.
Biden and Harris have repeatedly sought a permanent ceasefire solution; Trump by contrast reached out to Bibi to undermine said ceasefire negotiation. Both sides obviously deny this call because it would be blatantly illegal and undermining in public optics, but we know this is par for the course for both of them. It is in the interest of both Trump and Bibi to deny the ceasefire in order to make Biden/Harris look bad through the election.
The zateo article never says 'withholding all aid,' it's completely congruent with the YouGov data which I also linked. It says 'withhold weapons' in the context of Conditional Military Aid, which is where weapon shipments are withheld as long as Israel violates International Humanitarian Law, which they are.
We, the US, are also continuing to violate International Humanitarian Law, as well as the Leahy Law, by continuing to send weapons unconditionally.
It was a single shipment, all others were not paused. Plus they continued with that single shipment anyway, regardless of the war crimes. Who gave the backlash? It certainly wasn't the American public. It was Netanyahu and other members of the Israeli Government, who are currently committing genocide.
November is not 'many months old.'
Also, 51% of Jewish Americans Support Withhold Arms Shipments to Israel. Painting the Democrats decisions to continue unconditional aid as if it's in the best interest of the majority of Jewish Americans is untrue. Judaism is not Zionism.
Blowback is the violent retaliation that happens after repeatedly attacking Civilian populations with overwhelming force. Continuing to send billions worth of weapons unconditionally for a genocide certainly isn't helping prevent blowback.
30 days after acknowledging that Israel has committed violations of international humanitarian law and is withholding aid to a starving population is insane, especially since it places the window until after the election when people want to see a change now. Those people can't wait 30 days. The US basically gave Israel a 30-day window to continue violating International Humanitarian Law and starving millions of people before even the semblance of consequences. And it isn't conditional aid, it's 'possible consequences' while the Administration simultaneously said that the warning was 'not met as a threat. '
Rhetoric is not action. The actions of the Biden Administration have certainly not been in favor of a permanent ceasefire.
One Year of Empty Rhetoric From the White House on Israel’s Wars
Obviously Trump is significantly worse. I've never once told people to vote for Trump. Literally the opposite, I've only expressed that people should vote for Harris despite the Democratic Administrations unconditional support for this genocide. I will continue to criticize them for it until they change course.