this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2024
165 points (88.7% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3947 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
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
165
Kamala Harris shifts tone on Gaza, but advocates say US voters want more (www.aljazeera.com)
submitted 3 months ago by Linkerbaan@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
42 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Washington, DC – Vice President Kamala Harris says she will “not be silent” in the face of Palestinian suffering, as Israel’s war in Gaza rages on.

But Palestinian rights advocates want to know exactly what that means for United States foreign policy.

The vice president — and the Democrats’ likely nominee for the presidency — emphasised the plight of Palestinians in Gaza after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday. Nevertheless, she pledged ongoing support for Israel.

Activists say expressing sympathy for Palestinians without pursuing a meaningful shift away from the US’s policy of unconditional military and diplomatic support will not help Harris win back voters alienated by President Joe Biden’s approach to the war.

“Without an actual commitment to stop killing the children of Gaza, I don’t care about her empathy for them,” said Eman Abdelhadi, a sociologist at the University of Chicago. She stressed that the US bears “responsibility” for the atrocities committed against Palestinians.

“To be empathetic to someone that you’re shooting in the head is not exactly laudable. We don’t need empathy from these people. We need them to stop providing the weapons and the money that is actively killing the people that they’re supposedly empathising with.”

all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 62 points 3 months ago

Right. So, I’m Jewish. What i want is for Harris to tell Netanyahu: “stop killing Palestinian kids for fucking nothing, or i will cut off all foreign aid to your shithole country”. But i will settle for weak-ass half measures because any incremental gain literally saves lives. She can play hardball later on, if there is some way for her and congress to undermine AIPAC. More than likely, that’s going to be a generations-long struggle.

Harris 2024. Fuck russia, including the republican traitor filth.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 26 points 3 months ago

Some great quotes here.

To be empathetic to someone that you’re shooting in the head is not exactly laudable.

Unfortunately, Harris is kinda stuck. Even if she wins the election, Biden is still President until January. She can’t undermine his foreign policy too much.

I hope she actually does what’s good for Palestine once she’s in a better position to.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Unfortunately, polls on this issue have come up with highly varied results. So long as a very significant number of Americans support Israeli military action though, she will probably retain this half-half position, to not alienate older voters that tend to support Israel.

This will not be improved by speaking in support of hamas, claiming they are some sort of "freedom fighters" or anything like that, when they never allowed Gazans any freedoms.

A better idea would be to talk about encroachment of Israeli settlements and sanctioned violence in the West Bank under Netanyahu in defiance of the two-state solution proposed in the Oslo Accords (simply known to Americans from the time as the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Deal, negotiated during the Clinton years), and statements from prominent Israelis about the apartheid-like situation of Gaza over the years.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

This is not true. Polls have showed massive support for a ceasefire. Over 70% of Democrats.

Israel has never allowed Gazans any freedoms while they locked them inside of a concentration camp you mean right?

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

70% of democrats supporting a cease fire does not mean Israel does not have significant support. Democrats are not the only voters she wants, she also wants independents and anti-Trump republicans. Cease fires can be temporary.

https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/majority-in-u-s-say-israel-has-valid-reasons-for-fighting-fewer-say-the-same-about-hamas/#:~:text=Views%20of%20the%20Israeli%20government,from%2012%25%20to%2021%25.

Neither hamas nor Israel allowed Gazans freedoms. Hamas has held power there since being voted in almost 20 years ago, and has never allowed another election.

[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And both Biden and Harris support a ceasefire.

Do 70% of Democrats also support a complete cessation of all weapon sales to Israel? Or ending our diplomatic ties with Israel? Or even a two state solution?

This is a complex web of an issue. Support for a ceasefire does not translate to support for stopping weapons to Israel, nor anything else about the issue. Don't pretend otherwise

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago

Biden and Harris do not support a ceasefire. If they did they would use their leverage to achieve it.

Words and actions are different don't pretend otherwise.

[–] Timii@biglemmowski.win -5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A better alternative than letting them free range in a war zone while Israel tries to hunt terrorists and rescue hostages. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[–] Tyrangle@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

From a political perspective it's amazing how much of a lose-lose this situation has been for Biden and now Harris. Half the country is calling him "Genocide Joe" for supporting Israel while the other is calling him antisemitic for supposedly abandoning Israel. To be fair I think one side is arguing in bad faith and these aren't equally valid positions, but regardless not a soul in this country seems to be content with our current approach - even if it's intended as some sort of compromise.

[–] EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 months ago

The $5m she's taken from AIPAC and the language in her letter the other day regarding Union Station suggests she's gonna mirror Biden policy of condoning and funding genocide.

Unless she takes a hard stance with threats to remove money and weapons then the status quo is what we should expect.

[–] greenshirtdenimjeans@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 months ago

How come no one that runs for president is ever as perfect as me.