99
War Hawk becomes Peace Hawk (lemmy.ml)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/ManufacturingConsent@lemmy.ml
27 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 7 months ago* (17 children)

I'm no fan of Kamala, but vague gesturing towards stopping nuclear armament (it even says in that picture "diplomatic solution still preferable") is different from a full mask-off declaration that they're going to commit warcrimes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 21 points 7 months ago (8 children)

    Well have I got great news for you: Trump said he wouldn't start any wars before the election and not bomb Iran at all!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] -14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

    There's a difference between known liar Trump, who contradicts himself from one sentence to the next, and Kamala, who is a bog-standard politician. This is just a hypothetical of course, but I think it'd be incredibly likely that Kamala would have continued economically suppressing Iran via sanctions, maybe some half-hearted attempts at another nuclear deal, but would have had advisors presenting what military aggression would mean for the region (including the economic damage of them blocking the strait) to prevent her from pushing this far. She'd likely be another Biden: not directly assisting Israel in aggression, but too cowardly to call them out in any meaningful way.

    Anyone with a functioning brain could see Trump was talking out of his ass on this topic, especially when project 2025 explicitly talks about waging a regime change war on Iran and assisting Israel in bombing Iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 18 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    There’s a difference between known liar Trump, who contradicts himself from one sentence to the next, and Kamala, who is a bog-standard politician.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -15 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    She’d likely be another Biden: not directly assisting Israel in aggression, but too cowardly to call them out in any meaningful way.

    Again, there's a difference between complicity via silence, and complicity via an active bombing campaign. Neither is good by any stretch of the imagination, but the latter is clearly worse than the former.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 18 points 7 months ago*

    I don't understand your point. Both of them have a massive track record of lying. But the one thing Trump did actually have was a record of not starting any wars in his previous presidency.

    Both of them are in the pocket of AIPAC but Kamala was signalling that if Iran didn't agree to a "diplomatic solution" then she would start a war. Which is literally what Trump did was well. He told Iran to give up the nukes. Iran said no. Then he bombed Iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 7 months ago*

    The Biden administration actively structured it's weapon shipments in such a way that they wouldn't trigger Congressional oversight, they actively ran with the "Hamas 40 beheaded babies" blood libel, they actively condemned anti genocide protestors, they actively sent special forces to build that pier they used for a hospital massacre, they are are as actively complicit as it is possible to be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 7 months ago (1 child)

    And look who she was specifically speaking to and when. She was specifically campaigning to Jewish voters. She’d probably say anything to get their vote.

    While the dnc is an atrocity, their members aren’t wrong for calling this a genocide.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] -12 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    It literally says diplomacy is preferable but all options are on the table.

    Am I nuts or is that a reasonable, balanced position?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 7 months ago*

    It's relative. It's not exactly a reasonable, balanced position, but it's more reasonable than the alternative which is clear and unambiguous war crimes, and possibly meets the criteria for genocide.

    We knew what Trump's policy was on the campaign trail:

    On Iran, Project 2025 advocates a markedly more confrontational stance, denigrating diplomacy and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in favor of barely veiled advocacy for regime change.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent