765
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But I’ve heard this take before (well, except the Hitler part, that’s bat-shit insane) and it might be worth reflecting why a lot of the electorate no longer sees the Democratic party as the anti-war party. That’s a big shift that’s occurred in my lifetime, and it’s worth examining.

Because they're idiots?

Every major war started in my lifetime (including the "war on drugs") was started by Republicans.

The Democratic party is the party of complacency, I'll grant them that, and we were in wars for several administrations that Republicans started. So it's hard for their donkey brains to remember when and why the wars started and when they ended. A lot of people think that Obama was in office when 9/11 happened. The country is full of idiots.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

I think you can't approch it from a party line issue. People want to see it in fact as action for the candidates, and at least right now Biden dropped the ball on Isreal badly. He should have put harsh levers on Isreal to get them out of Gaza quickly, Ukraine is a more complicated problem, but the US should focus more on ending conflicts quickly rather than let them drag on forever. But that takes real policy and leadership.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Neither war is happening on US soil (or between the US and any country involved) and the US and Israel have had an alliance -- which will remained unchanged if not strengthened in the Trump-Vance administration -- spanning decades. In addition, Congress allocates funds to send to other countries and the President executes the orders he is given. Biden could've vetoed the aid bills I suppose, but there is a good chance that they would've overridden his veto. He could've impounded the funds, but I'm not really sure how strictly-speaking legal that even is, and Democratic administrations face pressure from both sides to follow norms (i.e. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's own party members would've impeached and removed him given just cause for doing so).

But, as per usual, people like yourself expect the impossible (world peace) under Democratic administrations and yet many of them will turn around and think any war that Trump starts is fully justified and support it bigly until the next Democrat (if there is one) gets in there.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

In addition, Congress allocates funds to send to other countries and the President executes the orders he is given. Biden could’ve vetoed the aid bills I suppose

Biden literally bypassed congress to send more aid than what they had approved multiple times.

I hate the way liberals just shamelessly lie about this stuff, you don't even have the excuse of the election anymore.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The article you linked, did you even read it? That is approval of weapons sales, not sending them more money.

Congress allocates funds in our government.

I hate the way liberals just shamelessly lie about this stuff

I hate the way label obsessed "leftists" don't know basic shit about how the government works, and spend all of their time online talking out of their ass and name-calling.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

That is approval of weapons sales, not sending them more money.

And that matters why? We shouldn't be giving them aid or selling them weapons?

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

That's right, just accuse me of lying and post ap news articles that don't disprove anything I said, and then when it turns out you were wrong...words no longer matter!

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You're arbitrarily focusing on something Biden doesn't control while intentionally ignoring the stuff he's very clearly and intentionally done to materially support Israel. That's obviously disingenuous. Suggesting that the problem is he just doesn't have the power to do anything differently is a lie.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

Suggesting that the problem is he just doesn’t have the power to do anything differently is a lie.

I wrote about things he conceivably could've done differently. I also stated some possible reasons why he didn't do those things. How is that a lie?

If a president truly wanted to stop supporting Israel, they absolutely could do it, but it would come with repercussions. Either Biden did not want to face those repercussions, or did not want to stop supporting Israel. In his case, it's probably both.

Believe it or not, some people are still outraged over the terrorist attack that occurred in October 2023. The US had a similar scale attack on 9/11/01 and launched two lengthy ass wars over it.

I don't support this shit and think it's an overreaction similar to how the "war on terror" was, but there was no choice to be made in this election cycle about this issue.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I wrote about things he conceivably could’ve done differently. I also stated some possible reasons why he didn’t do those things. How is that a lie?

Because you completely ignored the stuff he actively did to make the problem worse. It's like saying, like, "Sure, Ted Bundy could've been more supportive of women by donating or volunteering for various causes, but he was busy and short on cash. Sure, he could've done better." It's absolutely ridiculous. The lie is in the way you frame it. But Ted Bundy only killed 36 women while the weapons Joe Biden went out of his way to give to Israel have killed orders of magnitude more. So what you're saying is even more absurd that that.

Absolutely inexcusable genocide apologia.

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world -2 points 1 month ago

Not everyone sees it as a genocide. The political class especially doesn't see it as a genocide.

You and yours see even simple explanations of other people's viewpoints as agreeing with them...because you're simpletons.

You can keep screeching about it online all you like...making crappy analogies and apologizing for Ted Bundy? weirdly?, but there was zero choice to be made between Trump and Harris on support of Israel. Both support Israel, and Israel will continue to do whatever it wants regardless of your online bullshit.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Saying they're the party of complacency isn't really accurate. Obama may not have started any new wars (although there's an argument to be made that his operations in Somalia represented a new, unsanctioned war front), but he didn't get us out of Afghanistan, kept joint military operations going in Iraq, and created a massive, unaccountable robot assassination program that killed thousands of people, including U.S. citizens. That's wasn't an act of complacency, it was expansion.

To me, the difference in Democrats' and Republicans' positions on military use can be best summerize by how Obama and Trump reported drone deaths. Obama reclassified every adult male in a target zone as an enemy combatant so that he could artificially lower the number of civilian casualties. Trump just stopped reporting the numbers. One is obviously better than the other, but I wouldn't call either anti-war.

But let's say you're right; the Democrats are mostly anti-war, but they're too complacent with the status quo, and Trump voters are all idiots who can't tell the difference. What are we gonna do about it? 51% of the electorate went to Trump. Are the Democrats going to stand up to the military industrial complex to make their anti-war stance so clear even an idiot could see it? Or are they just gonna lose forever?

[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But let’s say you’re right; the Democrats are mostly anti-war, but they’re too complacent with the status quo, and Trump voters are all idiots who can’t tell the difference. What are we gonna do about it? 51% of the electorate went to Trump. Are the Democrats going to stand up to the military industrial complex to make their anti-war stance so clear even an idiot could see it? Or are they just gonna lose forever?

You're predicating your false dichotomy on the idea that: (A) the electorate will vote consistently for pacifism and for pacifists, (B) the electorate tracks the policy positions of politicians. Neither of these things are true.

This single issue did not decide this election, and it will not decide future ones (if we even have them) either.

The electorate is vibes based and has been for some time now.

this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
765 points (98.2% liked)

Microblog Memes

6017 readers
1584 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS