this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
198 points (83.9% liked)

politics

18883 readers
4579 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
 

Joe Biden will not be the Democratic nominee in November’s presidential election, thankfully. He is not withdrawing because he’s being held responsible for enabling war crimes against the Palestinian people (though a recent poll does have nearly 40 percent of Americans saying they’re less likely to vote for him thanks to his handling of the war). Yet it’s impossible to extricate the collapse in public faith in the Biden campaign from the “uncommitted” movement for Gaza. They were the first people to refuse him their votes, and defections from within the president’s base hollowed out his support well in advance of the debate.

The Democrats and their presumptive nominee Kamala Harris are faced with a choice: On the one hand, they can continue Biden’s monstrous support for Netanyahu, the brutal IDF, and Israel’s genocide of Palestinians. That would help allow the party to cover for Biden and put a positive spin on a smooth handoff, even though we all know this would mainly benefit the embittered president himself and his small coterie of loyalists. Such a choice would confirm that the institutional rot that allowed the current situation to develop still characterizes the party.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I wouldn't personally go with "Jewish Money" as the terminology...😬

That aside, certainly the effect of AIPAC and friends is a part of the pathology. That doesn't change the fact that Joe Biden could end the genocide anytime he wanted. The Zionist entity cannot survive without US hard power backing.

[–] FenrirIII 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean, it comes from people who identify as Jewish and who support the state of Israel. How is that not correct?

Joe Biden cannot stop Israel. They have openly and repeatedly made known their plan to conquer Gaza. They're already allowing "settlers" (terrorists) in to attack the local Palestinians and steal their land. American citizens, including many who donate to AIPAC, are getting involved in land deals for the conquered territory.

The entire powerbase of the western world is either taking part in the genocide and/or profiting from it or unable to do the right thing because of the political and financial power of the former.

Even if that wasn't the case, Israel is the only friendly nation in the middle east for western powers. Iran regularly starts shit and Saudi Arabia committed 9/11 (which we ignore because they have oil). A Jewish state is much friendlier to the (mostly white, Christian) government of the US.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Joe Biden could order a blockade on the single functioning port. Joe Biden's Treasury department could instantly destroy the occupier economy with sanctions, as they should be doing under US and international law. Joe Biden could signal to the Iranians and Hezbollah that Israel is no longer allowed to operate with impunity.

Don't make the mistake of confusing pretend impotence for true impotence.

I agree that the entire West is complicit in the genocide.

Regarding "friendly nations," what happened to make the Iranians unfriendly to the United States?