| |
| ▲ | galangalalgol a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It seems like about 20% of people judge the actions of a us administration independent of their partisan positions. I am recently joined and cannot claim it is from any virtue on my part. A backlash against an attempted autocratic takeover is a common starting point for successful ones by an opposing party. Leftist autocratic coups are only slightly rarer than rightist ones. We are in the middle of an attempted rightist one, but that doesn't mean we are safe if we remove them. | |
| ▲ | nozzlegear a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >If Biden had launched this war, none of these people would have had a problem with it. I am 100% positive on that assumption. I think you're wrong here. As a Biden stan who's gone to the mat debating Biden's policies here on HN many times in the past, he lost pretty much all of the remaining good will he had by defending and supporting Israel for so long after it became clear what they were doing in Gaza. Biden wouldn't be getting a free pass in the Middle East if it were helping Israel's goals (ignoring the fact that Biden is much more of a dove than Trump). | |
| ▲ | mcphage a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Basically, if Trump does a thing, they are against it, independent of the thing. Because on top of doing terrible things, the non-terrible things he does, he does incredibly badly. > There is no principle, just reactionary hatred. No, we’re all good little Bayesians around here. > If Biden had launched this war, none of these people would have had a problem with it. You’re really missing what’s going on here. The reason that people liked Biden is that he would not have launched this war. | | |
| ▲ | what a day ago | parent [-] | | > The reason that people liked Biden is that he would not have launched this war. No, they liked him because he wasn’t Trump. And then they liked Trump more after having him. | | |
| ▲ | nozzlegear 17 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I liked Biden because he's a genuinely good statesman, with decades of experience building bipartisan relationships (some admittedly bad, most good) both domestically and internationally. I didn't vote against Trump in 2020, I voted for Biden. And you can bet your sweet bippy that I'd do it again. | |
| ▲ | mcphage 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > And then they liked Trump more after having him. And it only cost them their country. Not bad! |
|
| |
| ▲ | anon7000 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I highly disagree, one clear thing conservatives and liberals largely agree on is no more wars in the Middle East. It’s astonishing to me that Trump supporters who voted for an isolationist policy are happy with him intervening in the Middle East (not to mention South America) again. Yes, I am “reactively” hating our president for starting wars without congressional approval and with very handwavy explanations. Besides, he has a track record for saying whatever the fuck he wants if he thinks people will like it, so you can’t trust the words from his mouth anyways. It’s pretty infuriating, actually. I would be much happier if there was a clear justification and rational explanation for the president starting more wars in the Middle East. And yes, because Biden has a slightly better baseline of not telling bold-faced lies, I could see more people giving the benefit of the doubt at first. But overall, liberals did not like Biden very much. Trump, on the other hand, has a pretty hardcore base of people who don’t seem to care what he says or that he does/says the opposite of what he used to say. Pretty weird. By the way, this opinion is not formed by reading or listening to any kind of mainstream media. It’s formed from listening to the words coming out of Trump’s mouth for the past fucking decade. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen a day ago | parent [-] | | If "no more wars in the middle east" means that America can not protect herself from a nation that regularly chants Death To America, then it really means "I'd rather see America as a society fail than stand up and defend myself". | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | Words are violence!!! Chanting for death to any country or religion is not violence dude. Until and actually Iran launches an attack on the USA. Iran didn't start this war, America and Israel did, while right in the middle of a pretend negotiation with them. I believe this is a strong sign that any time Israel or America are asking to negotiate with any country, they should prepare a full scale military action ready for the real "negotiation". edit: Are you a dual citizen? Everyone has a right to free speech of course and to support or not support any country or cause. But if you feel so strongly about a foreign country, why don't you be honest with yourself and pick a lane. I say this to everyone, not just Israeli, but Chinese, Dutch, any other dual citizens. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are correct, words are not violence. Arming the Huthis, Hezbollah, Hamas, and various Iraqi militias _is_ violence. When an aggressor with a history of violence says that they are coming for you next, it is prudent to believe them. Iran has been chanting Death To America and Death To Israel for decades. They have been attacking Israel and are developing technology to attack the United States. It is the United States' responsibility to ensure that the attack will not come. Claiming that Iran is not violent is a lie. Promoting the idea that the US should wait to be attacked first is a nice way to allow Iran to arm properly and ensure US interests are sufficiently harmed. | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Most importantly, Iran has always complied with audits to its nuclear program. I would much more urgently worry about the only country in the middle east that lies about having nukes, refuses to get them audited and continually starts wars with anyone and everyone, and proclaims everything under the sun as "antisemitism" and then gins up military action against supposed "antisemites" whenever it can. Hundreds of illegal nukes in the hands of such a volatile entity are grounds for immense world wide existential concern. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | I know who you are implying, so go ahead and mention a single war that they have started. | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | This very war being one? | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | This very war that began with Iranian agents invading Israel, taking hostages, beheading people, raping women, murdering the elderly in their homes? By what conceivable measure do you think Israel started it? | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are extremely confused. Gaza is not Iran. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | The Gazans are armed by Iran. Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for Palestine Liberation, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the Popular Resistance Committee, the Mujahideen Brigades, and the Islamic Republic all claim this. | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Then likewise why shouldn't dozens of countries across the world launch invasions against the USA due to the USA sponsoring countless terroristic proxies around the world. If "Iran" did oct 7th then America did 9/11, America did the contras massacres, America did Saddam Hussein chemical attacks. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Iran is violent...to its own people yes. If we want to play the proxy game then there is an unending list of proxies used by the USA all over the world to commit terrorism and war. Then by that the USA and Israel should be nuked multiple times over in proportion with the extreme level of proxy violence they commit. Since you haven't said this about the USA, then I will have no choice but to say you are lying about Iran and applying a different standard. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'll bite. Maybe I'm ignorant. Who are the US proxies committing terrorism and war? | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | You really don't know about Contra? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contras It was a really massive thing. or the Mujahiddeen. Oh look, the list is so long there's an entire article about it, fun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_state-sponso... So tell me, if Israel is justified in invading Iran due to alleged proxies of Iran attacking them, would you agree that all these countries should invade the United States? | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Alright, help me out on this. The Contras were anti-Marxist central American revolutionaries, yes? The Marxists overthrew the president of Nicaragua, and the US supported them, along with other nations. Israel is mentioned as being an ally, but is not mentioned in any other capacity in the article. The US was funding them with arms sold to Iran, in the hope that Iran would pressure Hezbollah to release American hostages. The Contras were found to be terrorists, that the CIA claimed were due to poor discipline, and then the Contra leader was executed. Did I get that right? Seriously fill in the blanks for me, the Wikipedia page seems written for somebody who already knows the story. I also read part of the linked Iran-Contra page hoping it would shed some light. | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah "poor discipline" /s. It was well known what the Contras were engaging in. And they are far from the only terrorist group the USA has actively sponsored. I do not think Israel is involved in this. These were examples of America funding and supporting terrorism all over the world. So if you say that Iran deserved to be invaded despite not having physically attacked anyone else but due to supposed proxy agents activities, then what should countries do to the USA who has funded much larger and worse terrorist networks? | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Was the intention of the United States, when funding the Contras, specifically to murder people? Did the United States publicly support and legitimise murder, rape, and hostages as a political tactic? Serious question. I don't see any evidence they did. | | |
| ▲ | donkeybeer 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Would you be asking about intent if the end result of some "well intentioned" program was the murder of thousands of jews and terrorism all over Israel? Do you ask about intent for example when speaking of the deaths caused by well intentioned Soviet communism? And I have given a much longer list than just the contras, where you can't even hide behind "but the origins were noble", they supported already terroristic entities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | surgical_fire a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen a day ago | parent [-] | | Yes, Hamas had been shooting rockets at Israel for almost two decades by that point. | | |
| ▲ | surgical_fire a day ago | parent [-] | | Probably for no reason whatsoever. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | Probably because the destruction of the state of Israel is clearly stated in the Hamas charter. As is massacre of Jews. If you don't know this, then you probably shouldn't have such strong opinions on the topic. | | |
| ▲ | surgical_fire 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, nothing to do with the interference on Iran from the US since the coup in 1953. Nothing to do with how aggressive and expansionist Israel has been since its inception, not to mention how it abuses and oppresses the Palestinian population. If you don't know this, then you probably should cut your bullshit. Who am I kidding? Of course you know this. You just choose to ignore it. | | |
| ▲ | dotancohen 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Nothing to do with how aggressive and expansionist Israel has been since its inception,
Israel has been expansionist only during active wars started by her neighbours. Arabs kill people, Jews counter by taking the land used to kill her citizens, and people like you decide that land is more important than life.Then when Arabs invade Israel, and publish maps of areas they have considered, and Israel goes in to rescue her hostages, suddenly life is more valuable than land and Israel is at fault again. > not to mention how it abuses and oppresses the Palestinian population.
The only oppression the Palestinians have suffered at the hands of Israel are measures that Israel has taken to defend her citizens. The Palestinians themselves will tell you that they suffer far more from their own leaders and from the neighbouring Arab states, than from Israel. |
|
|
|
|
|
|