The United States stresses that integral to this pledge is the commitment never to allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon, and that it is prepared to use all elements of its national power to ensure that outcome. The United States further affirms the commitment to work together with other partners to confront Iran’s aggression and destabilizing activities, whether advanced directly or through proxies and terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Its the same doctrine that the Trump whitehouse is following. Biden supported the genocide of Palestine, under this doctrine. Do you think Kamala would have been to stop the 12 day war? Or would have even been interested in stopping it?
I don’t. At least not with the level of support to Israel you describe, a level of support almost certainly she would have maintained or at least increased. It would have been more polite. Probably more competent. Maybe they would have built a coalition first. Maybe they spend 6 months sane-washing it so that BlueMAGA supports it.
But this is what Israel wanted. And the Biden Whitehouse and the Harris candidacy ran on a policy of giving Israel everything they wanted.
Eh. For decades US Presidents have given full-throated support to Israel. For decades they have hugged Israel’s PM and invited them to Congress. For decades Israel has asked US Presidents to bomb Iran to dust. And for decades US Presidents said no. Until Trump.
I think a big part of “why now” is that the decades of propaganda painting Israel as the “good guys” of the region have really frayed. I believe that this was basically the last-ditch effort by Israel to meet it’s most desired strategic objectives before it loses its remaining political cover. There may have been more pushback from a less incompetent military under Harris, but I’m not at all confident that she wouldn’t have been sold on it anyway.
That’s only a valid argument if you assume more votes would be gained from acceding to their demands than not. Otherwise you still end up with a loss, only now you’re looking at the fucking Zionist ‘moderates’ being the missing piece that we have to accede ‘full-throatedly’ to, since we can’t ‘stop fascism’ without them.
Yeah this was the hand-wringing the trope they rolled out during the elections. Considering that the majority of Zionists are republicans already, at least in the form of Cristian zionists, we (both now and should have then) can readily dismiss this. It gets the Democratic candidate bupkis.
Yeah this was the hand-wringing the trope they rolled out during the elections.
And a miscalculation (or, depending on your point of view, throwing the game for the opposition) does not mean that the idea is inapplicable.
“They should have leaned more towards anti-Zionists to win” does not equate to “Completely acceding to anti-Zionists in a coalition which includes a large number of Zionists would have brought victory.”
Considering that the majority of Zionists are republicans already, at least in the form of Cristian zionists, we (both now and should have then) can readily dismiss this. It gets the Democratic candidate bupkis.
Okay, it doesn’t fucking matter that most Zionists are Republicans. What matters is that a sizable percentage, even if a minority, of Democrats are Zionists.
Using the term Zionist as you would on here, on Lemmy/the Fediverse, what percentage of Dem voters - who make up a good 1/3 of this country’s electorate - do you think are Zionists? How many do you think we can lose? How many dedicated anti-Zionists are out there in the electorate, willing to vote for the Dems if they change position on just this one issue?
Okay, it doesn’t fucking matter that most Zionists are Republicans.
I want to push back on this, because I think it does matter, because it speaks to Democratic strategy for the election. Who are you doing a thing for? Its not any different than them heading hard right with their campaign post/ during the convention: Who is the thing for?
What matters is that a sizable percentage, even if a minority, of Democrats are Zionists.
And what percentage are Muslim? Or are Palestinian? Or from Mexico? Or… or… or… and I can go on, for all the groups Democrats lost with how they approached both governance and the election.
The argument I saw out there was that Harris couldn’t break with Biden on Palestine, or else she would lose Pennsylvania. Well she lost Pennsylvania. And in her effort to not lose Pennsylvania, she also lost Michigan. And Georgia and Nevada. Calling it a miscalculation is like… its a gross understatement.
I can’t believe we have to relitigate all of this because Booker has decided that he, one of the least popular Democrats in history, has decided he doesn’t want the left to have a roll in the Democratic party.
Its basically political fact that Harris blew it with her support of Israel, and by not campaigning to her base. Instead of pre-blaming voters, the blueMaga contingent should have been actively advocating for policy changes instead of defending positions the voters had made loud and clear, that they would not vote for.
And if you are ABWD/ BlueMAGA, we don’t need to worry about your perspectives, because your vote is a forgone conclusion. You aren’t gaining voters catering to the sensibilities of privileges liberals. You win elections growing coalitions into groups of voters you either lost or didn’t have.
It’s fair to say that Israel has wanted to push out or kill all the Palestinians for decades, yet no POTUS before Biden gave them carte blanche to do so. Going on that standard there’s no telling what Biden’s actual red lines were. Especially since reducing Iran to reinforce the stranglehold of the global north’s oligarchs has long been a goal of the Pentagon too.
https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/07/14/the-jerusalem-u-s-israel-strategic-partnership-joint-declaration/ (because the WH direct link memory holed’ it)
Its the same doctrine that the Trump whitehouse is following. Biden supported the genocide of Palestine, under this doctrine. Do you think Kamala would have been to stop the 12 day war? Or would have even been interested in stopping it?
I don’t. At least not with the level of support to Israel you describe, a level of support almost certainly she would have maintained or at least increased. It would have been more polite. Probably more competent. Maybe they would have built a coalition first. Maybe they spend 6 months sane-washing it so that BlueMAGA supports it.
But this is what Israel wanted. And the Biden Whitehouse and the Harris candidacy ran on a policy of giving Israel everything they wanted.
Eh. For decades US Presidents have given full-throated support to Israel. For decades they have hugged Israel’s PM and invited them to Congress. For decades Israel has asked US Presidents to bomb Iran to dust. And for decades US Presidents said no. Until Trump.
I think a big part of “why now” is that the decades of propaganda painting Israel as the “good guys” of the region have really frayed. I believe that this was basically the last-ditch effort by Israel to meet it’s most desired strategic objectives before it loses its remaining political cover. There may have been more pushback from a less incompetent military under Harris, but I’m not at all confident that she wouldn’t have been sold on it anyway.
Did you not notice the Gaza genocide? Whose presidency did it start under?
Please tell me you didn’t vote third party in November…
You keep following me around, straw-manning me, derailing the conversation, making ad hominem attacks. Get lost
Right …so anyways. Did you vote for Jill or not?
So you’ve moved on from bullying cross-dressers to bullying… people who ask why we’re bullying cross-dressers?
Really selling me and everyone else on how totally justified you were in your bullying.
Right. No anwser suggests you either voted third party, or you’re not even American anyways and your opinion on this matter does not matter.
Want to provide any input?
Pathetic.
I mean if they, did, I’m sure you’ll see the point in advocating full-throatedly to their demands, since you couldn’t stop fascism without them.
That’s only a valid argument if you assume more votes would be gained from acceding to their demands than not. Otherwise you still end up with a loss, only now you’re looking at the fucking Zionist ‘moderates’ being the missing piece that we have to accede ‘full-throatedly’ to, since we can’t ‘stop fascism’ without them.
Yeah this was the hand-wringing the trope they rolled out during the elections. Considering that the majority of Zionists are republicans already, at least in the form of Cristian zionists, we (both now and should have then) can readily dismiss this. It gets the Democratic candidate bupkis.
And a miscalculation (or, depending on your point of view, throwing the game for the opposition) does not mean that the idea is inapplicable.
“They should have leaned more towards anti-Zionists to win” does not equate to “Completely acceding to anti-Zionists in a coalition which includes a large number of Zionists would have brought victory.”
Okay, it doesn’t fucking matter that most Zionists are Republicans. What matters is that a sizable percentage, even if a minority, of Democrats are Zionists.
Using the term Zionist as you would on here, on Lemmy/the Fediverse, what percentage of Dem voters - who make up a good 1/3 of this country’s electorate - do you think are Zionists? How many do you think we can lose? How many dedicated anti-Zionists are out there in the electorate, willing to vote for the Dems if they change position on just this one issue?
I want to push back on this, because I think it does matter, because it speaks to Democratic strategy for the election. Who are you doing a thing for? Its not any different than them heading hard right with their campaign post/ during the convention: Who is the thing for?
And what percentage are Muslim? Or are Palestinian? Or from Mexico? Or… or… or… and I can go on, for all the groups Democrats lost with how they approached both governance and the election.
The argument I saw out there was that Harris couldn’t break with Biden on Palestine, or else she would lose Pennsylvania. Well she lost Pennsylvania. And in her effort to not lose Pennsylvania, she also lost Michigan. And Georgia and Nevada. Calling it a miscalculation is like… its a gross understatement.
I can’t believe we have to relitigate all of this because Booker has decided that he, one of the least popular Democrats in history, has decided he doesn’t want the left to have a roll in the Democratic party.
Its basically political fact that Harris blew it with her support of Israel, and by not campaigning to her base. Instead of pre-blaming voters, the blueMaga contingent should have been actively advocating for policy changes instead of defending positions the voters had made loud and clear, that they would not vote for.
And if you are ABWD/ BlueMAGA, we don’t need to worry about your perspectives, because your vote is a forgone conclusion. You aren’t gaining voters catering to the sensibilities of privileges liberals. You win elections growing coalitions into groups of voters you either lost or didn’t have.
This may come as a bit of a shock, but Gaza is not Iran.
Well no shit.
You don’t see a relationship between the two? You don’t see a pattern?
i didn’t say anything about Gaza. We’re talking about Iran
Well no shit.
You don’t see a relationship between the two? You don’t see a pattern?
I think you accidentally posted this twice.
I mean, I did post it twice to two separate people saying the same thing.
It’s fair to say that Israel has wanted to push out or kill all the Palestinians for decades, yet no POTUS before Biden gave them carte blanche to do so. Going on that standard there’s no telling what Biden’s actual red lines were. Especially since reducing Iran to reinforce the stranglehold of the global north’s oligarchs has long been a goal of the Pentagon too.
ftfy.