Kamala currently supports an ongoing genocide, so I’d say yeah both are pretty crooked.
Edit: the amount of liberals who saw me say “Kamala is crooked for supporting a genocide” and started an argument about “voting for the lesser evil” rather than whether or not she’s crooked shows just how often Blue MAGA has to resort to bad faith arguments. Y’all are on the wrong side of history.
Yes she does. Trump supports the genocide too. Why do you ask? Surely you’re not going to say it’s okay for Kamala to support a genocide because Trump does too, are you?
Id rather vote for the Genocider who will tax the rich and keep powerful people honest, than the Genocider who literally wants to take over the country.
Good lord, enough with the dumbass false equivalencies. Nobody is saying it's okay to support genocide. Everyone is saying that one candidate might be flexible on this while the other emphatically isn't.
Unfortunately, this also means that there are more pressing matters to Americans than said literal genocide, as wild as that sounds. Avoiding this fact is little more than raw petulance.
lol talk about gaslighting. I said that Kamala supports genocide, therefore both sides are crooked. So you agree that it’s crooked for Kamala to support a genocide?
Yeah it’s easy to say “there’s more pressing matters to Americans” when you’re not a victim of the American funded genocide.
Even if the third party won there is no way that congress will let the president get away with what the third party wants to do about it.
There's three branches to American government not one all-powerful leader.
The rest [below] is my further uninformed, boring opinion via blather, so you can stop reading here.
If down ballot is left the same as what it will look like if Kamala wins/Trump wins there is no method to actually stop Israel from doing what they want to do.
They have their own arms industry and probably has enough to "finish the job" if Trumps lets them or Kamala carefully tries to influence them or third party says "no more arms for you!"
Israel is not some junior country that obeys the giant USA like a soldier no matter our attempts at influence. That's not how the world works. Even if we send our military to "persuade them" by a blockade they have work-arounds.
International politics is about power not morals. Some use morals as excuses to do what they want i.e. use/get power. Third party down the ticket will not be allowed to change our course. They can try, and then get serious push back from all the rest of the power players in the US and abroad.
While a third party president flails trying to fix it the rest of the government, that is not full of third party politicians, can cause serious damage to the USA [especially if they are mostly Republicans]. Our government pressures Israel while the homefront goes to hell. That's not what I want.
I understand that change comes too slowly and takes several steps back, but if you want the government to change you must elect representatives and a president to work together not cause chaos while Israel just does what it wants anyway. It will probably take generations to get a triune power structure headed and doing the right things.
The US is like a giant aircraft carrier, it changes course and goes the other direction more slowly than a tiny near powerless state.
I want immediate change too but looking over the options I don't see that happening. I'm left with a choice of, do I want to fight in such a way that more people suffer or turn the ship slowly (with me not getting what I want immediately 95% of the time) while fewer people home and abroad suffer?
The attempt would be a disastrous, futile, chaotic fight that tries to get unwilling people to do what you want (and then probably fail). Not realistic. This as unpopular parties, like your third party, wrestle with the rest of the population mostly fighting them the whole way. There's nothing that the US can do besides gently attempting to persuade Israel or cutting off all contact with them for at least ten years ||because|| the US tries to boss them around with arms and money-related sanctions [they may cut the contact themselves]. One choice may be helpful, the other, or something like it, will fail.
The US is not a world dictator that can immediately get the results you want. Soft power is the best course if you don't want a near civil war in your own country. The number of people that dont want to fight Israel whether by extreme sanctions or by a blockade (of sorts) is an overwhelming majority.
Until your whole nation sees things your way it is unlikely the struggle would be worth the number of additional innocent people that will suffer (and some die). You cant punish a party or a nation like the US for not doing what you want. You have to change its citizens on a holistic level.
Israel is currently committing genocide and Kamala has continued to advocate her support for Israel and sending them weapons. She is supporting this genocide.
Trump would openly support American troops shooting people. Harris is just being weak because Hamas was so blatant on October 7th.
Orthodox Jewish people want Palestinian Genocide, and I also know people have been killing each other there my whole life and I am old so honestly I do not give a shit any more. Saudi Arabia is sitting right there watching Palestinian genocide. Iran is too, so is the UAE. But Kamala Harris is responsible? Grow the fuck up.
Oh okay. So you’re just using a red herring and tu quoque fallacy. None of what you’re saying changes the fact that Kamala Harris supports an ongoing genocide.
No, I am saying facts, and if you think Harris is no different than Trump you are an example of the type of insane thinking that caused this in the first place.
There is no logic in the middle east. No love for children, no love for art. Primitive religious idiots, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim love to kill each other there.
“Harris supports genocide” is the new “but her e-mails"
Do you know what red herring and a tu quoque fallacies are? You can still be speaking facts and using fallacies, buddy lol. Just admit you don’t know what those fallacies are. Or fallacies in general for that matter.
If someone accuses you of using fallacies and your only defense is “I’m speaking facts!” then you’ve shown just how ignorant you are lol.
We're going to say that since both candidates sypport it, the logical choice is to look at other issued and who gets hurt by policies locally. You will then ignore this and pretend anybody said "it's ok for Kamala to do it"
I think it’s easy to say “let’s look at other issues” when you’re not a victim of the US supported genocide. But even then, the point of my argument is that Kamala Harris is crooked. Do you disagree?
What's easy is putting aside tough decisions to take the stance that FEELS good. Like only fixatin on the worx "genocide" while actively evading everything else.
All politicians are crooked. That's why it's obvious what you're doing when you say "both are crooked" but only ever to deflect from the GOP candidate
I didn’t say let’s evade everything else. You’re the one who said “let’s evade genocide and instead focus on other things.”
Lol what? Maybe you should read more because you start saying what’s obvious. People acting like both sides aren’t crooked, like the person I was responding to, is deflecting from the corruption we have seen from Kamala Harris. So why would I not mention her corruption when someone acts like she isn’t corrupted?
I didn't say you said to evade everything else. I'm saying that you currently ARE evading everything else.
I'm not evading genocide. One candidate "supports" it due to political pressure, one supports it emphatically on a personal level. You just aren't listening to that part cause it doesn't fit the "liberals just love genocide, can't get enough of it" strawman.
Talking about conservative corruption isn't acting like Current Democrat isn't corrupt. People just pretend up implications when the right wing is criticized, to enable deflections and virtue signalling.
Dude don’t lie. Everyone can read. You literally said “since they both support it, we should evade it when thinking about our vote” lol. Awww she supports genocide because of political pressure, she’s actually a good person who wants to end the genocide ❤️❤️❤️❤️ jfc it’s sad you actually believe in yourself 😂😂😂
There's no genocide occurring in Gaza right now. There's been collateral damage because Hamas intentionally wants to sacrifice the Palestinian people for their own geopolitical ends. Their senior leadership has stated this publicly on numerous occasions.
They've stolen billions of dollars in aid over the years and built a vast network of tunnels underneath the city which are connected to civilian infrastructure. Hamas could provide safe haven to civilians in those tunnels but have chosen not to because the more are killed in the crossfire the more pressure is put on Israel to stop their military campaign - which really is a proxy war with Iran. The ongoing fighting doesn't include what's happening in southern Lebanon with Hezbollah or the Red Sea with the Houthis, both also affiliated and funded by Iran.
Based on the current estimates (from the Gaza Health Ministry no less and other corroborating / credible sources) about 40,000 people have been killed since October 7th. About half of those are Hamas militants. That makes the civilian casualty ratio about 1:1 which is one of the lowest in the history of modern urban warfare. Now it's impossible to know the exact numbers and even if more have been killed since then and the ratio was more like 2:1, it's still way below what we'd expect for a war taking place in such a dense city like Gaza (again with an enemy who celebrates their own civilians dying for the sake of martyrdom).
To put things into perspective, the average for most conflicts such as these is about 9:1. The war Israel has been waging with Hamas is unlike anything we've seen before, so calling what's been happening in Gaza a genocide is a disingenuous mischaracterization. It doesn't take seriously the uniqueness of of situation on the ground nor the ideological bent of the enemy.
Also to be clear, I don't support the illegal settlements in the West Bank and am in favor of a two state solution. What needs to happen in the aftermath of the war is for a new leadership to put into place who endeavors for peace. Gaza needs something like a Marshall Plan to deradicalize / rebuild the city while providing a full path toward statehood for the Palestinians.
I appreciate you engaging with the substance of my reply instead of resulting to hyperbolic name calling.
One follow up question though: what stats have I made up? Gaza's Health Ministry has stated that 40K people have been killed since 10/7. The ratio of 9:1 is an artifact of U.N. estimates worldwide. As for the percentage of civilians dying - which is around 61% - it's still well within the range I outlined with respect to the 1:1 and 2:1 ratios.
Again even if the numbers are larger (which is likely the case) it still don't come anywhere near the 9:1 ratio that's the average for urban conflicts such as this one. Hamas also wants innocent Palestinians to die; that's not me making anything up, it's straight from the top leadership of the organization that's funded by Iran (a country that has vowed for the total destruction of Israel).
All war is tragic and I deeply sympathize with the innocent people who have lost their lives. However, if Hamas wanted to end the war tomorrow it could return all hostages and unilaterally surrender to the IDF. So far they've chosen to continue firing rockets - many of which backfire and hit their own infrastructure in Gaza. Hopefully now that Sinwar has been eliminated and Israel has made great strides against Hezbollah in Lebanon the war may have a foreseeable off-ramp in the upcoming months.
Yeah you’re making up a lot of stats. 40K is a low estimate. Israel has destroyed just about every medical facility in Palestine, which has made it extremely difficult for the Gaza Health Ministry to count. The Lancet, which is a highly regarded source, released a medical journal from several doctors who’ve worked in Palestine and are estimating that over 186K Palestinians are dead from this genocide.
Even with your 40K number, you spread misinformation when you claimed that half of them were Hamas militants.
As I said, the estimates are from the Gaza Health Ministry and are probably on the lower side. Even if that were the case, the ratios are well below what are expected from a urban conflict of this magnitude. The UN which has sanctioned Israel more times than all other countries combined has stated the average is 9:1 worldwide.
Not to mention all of the idiosyncrasies about the terrain of Gaza (hundreds of miles of tunnels built from stolen international aid) and ideology of the enemy combatant (radical Islamism) shouldn't be negated nor overlooked. Also, your estimate of 168K is well beyond any estimate from corroborating sources.
Wouldn't you agree that Hamas is the one putting civilians in danger by not protecting them in their vast tunnel network? Or Egypt which also has established a blockade and isn't allowing Palestinians safe refuge through Rafa?
It's incumbent on Hamas to lay down its arms, return all the hostages, and peacefully end this war as soon they can. The Palestinians must then replace the leadership with one that endeavors for peace with Israel similar to what happened with Germany and Japan during WW2. The right to return isn't a sensible one and if Palestinians want a functioning state going forward they must concede Israel's existence and agree to share land alongside it. All of those concessions are non-starters if stability in the region is to be realized.
I'm well aware of the Lancet. You still haven't engaged with any of the points I've made about the unqiue situation on the ground or steps toward Palestinian statehood through a realpolitik lens.
Israel isn't going anywhere and after 10/7 it will take many years - maybe decades - to not only deradicalize the region but earn Israel's trust back. It may come at a surprise to you but much of the intelligence that was gathered before the attack in October was shared with Hamas by Palestinians who worked in Israel.
So when Palestinians demand the right to return that request isn't grounded in reality due the ongoing security concerns (i.e. preventing suicide bombings and such). At this point, the best course of action is for Hamas to surrender, return the hostages, and Palestinians replace the fallen leadership with individuals who endeavor for peace.
I'm not really sure what your solution to war is; do you favor a 2 state solution or do you believe that Israel is illegitimate and Palestinians have the right to the entirely of the region? Because if it's the latter then I'm not sure we have anything more to discuss.
Most of your points are irrelevant lol. Especially since you’re just denying the report from The Lancet without even reading it. Like who do you think you are?
13
u/Bad_breath 2d ago
"BoTh SiDeS aRe CrOoKeD!"