Death to Amerika; death to the settlers, death to the empire, death to its vassals.
hezbollah never killed an american who wasn’t where they weren’t supposed to be
the idf has killed multiple americans in the west bank where they had a visa and permission from the country to be in
the idf has killed multiple americans in the west bank where they had a visa and permission from the country to be in
President Biden and I do not want to see conflict in the Middle East escalate into a broader regional war. We have been working on a diplomatic solution along the Israel-Lebanon border so that people can safely return home on both sides of that border. Diplomacy remains the best path forward to protect civilians and achieve lasting stability in the region.
…and that is why we’ve handed billions upon billions of dollars worth of military equipment to the side actively committing a genocide, and why I’m putting out a statement condoning the political assassination of one of the people who we would theoretically be working with to create peace in the first place.
Death, and I cannot emphasize this enough, to America.
In the mouths of western politicians, the word “diplomacy” is synonymous with unconditional surrender. They would rather burn the world to the ground than accept that they can’t get all of their maximalist demands and engage in actual good faith negotiations with their adversaries, trying to work out a compromise.
As seen in Nagasaki and Hiroshima
IIRC the damage inflicted by the atomic bombings weren’t especially noteworthy compared to the rest of the bombing campaign, and it was more a way to test out their new toys. If the nukes hadn’t been used but conventional bombing had continued, it would likely have had a similar result. This video by Shaun lays out a pretty compelling case that the Japanese surrender was due to the Soviet declaration of war and invasion of Manchuria.
This is all ignoring of course that despite the insistence of unconditional surrender, the Americans accepted surrender with conditions and allowed the emperor to continue to hold his titles anyway. There’s definitely something to be said about taking maximalist positions just to make a point even when they don’t actually care about several of the goals that make up those positions.
it was more a way to test out their new toys.
And as a demonstration for any would-be challengers (one in particular, and we all know who) to the emerging US hegemonic dominance, a demonstration not just of the destructive capacity of nukes but of their willingness to use it.
Are you saying that using nukes against civilian populations was equivalent to conventional bombing because of “the damage”? What point are you trying to make here?
The fire bombing of civilians were terrible and shouldn’t be forgotten in the shade of the mushroom cloud.
The point is that Nagasaki and Hiroshima weren’t exceptional, but rather typical of US bombing strategies against civilian populations that the US has continued to use into the modern day.
I would say that by the very nature of it being nukes it was exceptional. Like, the very definition of exceptional. Yes, the USA often bombs instead of negotiating, that is not exceptional.
Death to Israel. Death to Amerikkka and it’s facilitation of child murder and ethnic cleansing
HEZBOLLAH destabilized the Middle East? A US Vice-President is saying this?
They have always equated sovereignty with instability
The Joy Reich will secure living space.
“They must secure the existence of their people and a future for joyful children”?
Death to Amerika.
A lot of angry downvotes
My downvote wasn’t in anger. It’s more about the fact that this isn’t a news article which makes it questionably breaking the rules of this /c/. Combined with the headline being serious editorializing via broad generalization of what the statement is. Not saying it’s not true, just that it’s a unnecessarily sensational.
MODS MODS an official statement from a politician isn’t news 3 tiny paragraphs have to be filtered through a journalist or i can’t read itthe headline being serious editorializing
what do journalists do i wonder
It’s a press release from the White House. Why would you need a journalist to stenograph it for it to become news?
And OP’s description is good, it helps cut through the typical liberal mealy-mouthed framings that are, otherwise, the only ones you would ever hear.
Why would you need a journalist to stenograph it for it to become news?
Because like Yogthos said, the only consumption liberals do comes pre-digested by the Jake Tappers, Rachel Maddows, and Wolf Blitzers of the world. It’d be funny in a disgusting way if these milquetoast know-nothing partisans didn’t have hands on the levers of the world.
But who will chew up this statement and feed it to me like a baby bird. How am I supposed to form an opinion without a media propagandist telling me what to think!
To be honest i would trust Yogthos who has been posting news threads for years than some paid journalists that has an agenda to whatever news they report. It resembles the old forum era where if you hang around long enough, you can trust/trust a little some users.
Trust no one, especially not yourself. Fuck that guy.
Liberals…
I think you might be the worst person ever
I downvoted and I’m not angry. I just recognize that this post is intentionally inflammatory and trolling. As is common from OP.
Wtf are you talking about? It’s literally a statement from the Whitehouse. How is Yog being intentionally inflammatory?!
Why is it inflammatory? As a mod I’m genuinely surprised people are upset by this, it is a white house press statement with an editorialized title that summarizes the event quickly and without any commentary on it.
You said it in your reply. An editorialized title–an extremely editorialized title, which was clearly crafted specifically to garner outrage.
I dont see it garnering outrage? It seems in line with what Kamala Harris said.
Posting news in a news comm of a presidential speech that is literally a link to the official government website of that president is “intentionally inflammatory and trolling”? This is a joke, right? You’re doing a bit and playing a caricature of a typical lib clown?
It’s the title that is inflammatory and trolling. Do you really not understand that editorializing is a thing?
Sorry bro guess it should have been ‘President Harris sends support to the troops in Isreal, god is on the side of the IDF’
Do you really not understand that titling any fucking post ever is doing the same thing? Fucking clown.
If the title was a NYT headline with two words changed: “Kamala Harris makes an official statement in condemnation of political terrorism” you wouldn’t be clutching your pearls, now would you? OP’s title is far more factual though, and that’s what you actually don’t like. You people are so transparent it’s laughable.
You sound ridiculous.
