you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago

    If you are saying this unironically you need to open a history book and look outside your bubble. Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, Haiti, former Yugoslavia, Sudan, Gaza, Vietnam, Dominican Republic, Somalia and many many more attacked and or destroyed under democrats.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 2 months ago (35 children)

    Republicans like to start wars.

    Compared to Democrats? How? Libya, Syria and Yemen were attacked under a Democratic president. In fact, Kamala said that Iran is the greatest threat in the world.

    Or better yet, the escalation of the genocide under Joe Biden? The genocidal monster who loves "Israel" so much https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYLNCcLfIkM

    Turns out, outside of Amerika; there is in fact not a single fucking difference between these 2 parties. All you care about is domestic affair concerning your treats. You don't give a fuck about people outside your area.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (12 children)

    The US has not formally declared war since WW2, so formal declaration cannot be your threshold.

    Wikipedia has got a list of "wars" in the 21st century that the US has participated in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States_in_the_21st_century

    Every president during this period makes the list.

    Edit: to clarify I'm not saying Wikipedia is straight facts. It's a convenient list. Using any other list is fine too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] [S] 18 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Biden supported Israel on day one of the war with everything he could even bypassing congress so yes, also its the Israeli–Palestinian war btw you dont call the other the Donbass war now do you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] [S] 14 points 2 months ago*

    if wikipedia said trump won the 2020 election would you believe it?

    also

    This article is about the ongoing war in the Gaza Strip and Israel. For the broader conflicts, see Gaza–Israel conflict and Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

    or do you refer to WW2 as the Polish German war?

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 20 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    Turns out, outside of Amerika; there is in fact not a single fucking difference between these 2 parties. All you care about is domestic affair concerning your treats. You don't give a fuck about people outside your area.

    🫰🫰🫰(That's snapping btw lol)

    Like I don't even expect people to overthrow the government tomorrow or whatever. Shit's scary, I get it. But like, it would be super cool if they could stop aggressively defending the child crushing in front of the world, on the internet. As a start.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Hello, I am a politician running on a proud history of supporting every war the US has been engaged in within my lifetime, as well as most of those outside of it. I would like to thank you for your vote, and please tell me - was your vote for me because of my warmongering or in spite of it? I sincerely await your answer, as it will mean a lot to what sort of policy I pursue <- How you seem to imagine it works when people vote for a warhawk despite their hawkishness.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    No. In fact one of Trump's campaign promises was that he wouldn't start foreign wars, and it polled as highly popular. Anyone that wasn't an idiot knew that was a lie, but at least he had the decency to lie about it. Democrats couldn't even muster up that much courage.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    The parties have been reduced down to their stance on this one issue because they can't even differ there. They both suck on all issues, but a lot of people would still vote for democrats if they could just not commit overt genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Ah yes Democrats famous for giving a shit when roe v Wade was overturned. Democrats whose candidate had one thing about trans people handling persecution: "They should follow the law"
    Democrats whose main takeaway from losing once again was that they were too woke on the gender stuff. They do fuck all about republicans which is the same as supporting it, which a large amount of them do as well. But im sure voting for them despite them working against you and yours will surely result in something good and not at all push them towards even more depraved goals. Like genocide. Which they are committing. I wonder what the next red line will be?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    You people keep acting as if you're being told to roll over and accept defeat. Nobody is saying that. What people are saying is "voting for the lesser evil doesn't work. Its such a dogshit strategy that there isn't any difference between those two parties anymore." And somehow you take that to mean there's nothing to be done. If you are really so hellbent on voting being the only thing you can do, then at least vote for a third party. But really you ought to be doing more than that.

    The absolute very best case scenario for a democrat is that they do fuck all. Most of them are far worse than that. They are typically doing the exact same shit as republicans, but no one gives a shit because they're not overt. I am not an accelerationist, so I dont believe its a good idea to concentrate power in the hands of capitalists, so I won't vote for the more competent managers of empire.

    In the case of a best-case democrat, you're also making things worse by voting for them, because your vote legitimises their inaction. Every election were democrats have won has been an election that normalised the monstrous. It didnt use to be like this, that you could just shell out cash for cops and child killers. You didnt use to just be able to hand out massive fracking contracts or senselessly pursue brinksmanship without anyone calling you out for the rabid warhawk that you were. Now it doesn't matter. John Kerry ran on being the better guy for the war in Iraq. Obama won his second term on the back of all his warmongering. It wasn't always like this. Decades of the lesser evil has lead us down this path, decades of "well we have to vote for them just this once, its the most important election dont you know" has put us where we are now. It clearly observably does not work.
    The very best of the democrats is just a republican a few election cycles behind. And most of them are far below par.
    Voting for them gives them legitimacy, its not a harmless action.

    And of those that are the very best, they quickly get engulfed and integrated by the machine, turned into the next generation of managers of empire.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago

    Yes, it is clear that you aren't following the logic. Maybe some context will help: The democrats support republican policies when they are in power.

    Also, who said that you should "just let the republicans have more power"? I didn't see anyone even suggest that.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 20 points 2 months ago (42 children)

    The meme didn't say they were the same, they said they both crush children. People gotta come with a list before it's okay? Not great for memes.

    (It's not just Palestinian children either btw)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 42 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Maybe if your only options are evil, after decades and centuries, it's time to stop being evil and start over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    When else can people put pressure on the lesser evil to "tone down" the evil? Or take the opportunity to ensure folks know about the evil? Isn't it when things look their worst they say "well actually we need to be slightly more evil to get those swing voters"?

    Maybe I don't understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to. How is there no shift to less evil under these conditions? So many individual elections for individual people and a whole lot of wack people getting elected.

    and they'd rather fight the lesser evil than the greater one.

    I think this is my point: when do they fight the lesser evil?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    Maybe I don’t understand the US system but I believe platforms are individual to candidates and that there are no overall party platforms that the candidates are expected to adhere to.

    While the platforms are technically individual, they aren't really. They have to get approval from their bosses (donors) on what they get to run on. And the few actual good things that they run on has to be just empty rhetoric. If they get elected, they are expected to immediately forget those things.

    when do they fight the lesser evil?

    Thats the neat part, they don't. The cycle goes like this:

    • It's election season. You can't point out that the child-killers want to kill children, or the evil people will win.
    • Election season is over. The child-killers are in power, but their hands are tied because of the evil people who aren't in power. Its unrealistic to expect the child-killers to just stop helping the evil people kill children.
    • It's election season. You can't point out that the child-killers have been killing children, or the evil people will win.
    • Election season is over. The child-killers aren't in power. What do you expect them to do? They have to keep helping the evil people kill children.

    Rinse, repeat

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    I decided against continuing the convo you are replying to because it felt like the other person and I had both explained our points of view and anything further might feel like trying to convince them to adopt mine but I had wanted to bring up primaries.

    Doesn't this same thing play out in the primaries? Otherwise how could the lesser evil stay evil?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    I can see why my wording was confusing when taken out of context. If you go up a few levels you can see that we are saying the same thing. Or at least I think?

    I asked when do people get to push back against the lesser evil, and someone said the primaries. What you were responding to here was me saying I don't see how that's possibly true if the primaries keep spitting out people who have no interest in being even slightly less evil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Iran is bi-partisan as is Gaza same as Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago

    Yes they're against Trumps manor of going about it and are all about virtue signaling when they have no power. Just like how Obama "was going to close Guantanamo". In reality it was their nominee for president who called Iran the biggest threat to America and continued to position for intervention.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (14 replies)
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago (8 children)
    • Both bomb kids
    • Both support genocide
    • Both support imperialism and colonialism
    • Both screw over the working class to help out their rich friends
    • Both openly lie about how they are going to fix things
    • Both leverage military and intelligence agencies against their own citizens

    The problem I have is when someone reduces the parties down to their stances on one single issue.

    The "foreign child crusher" in this comic is doing a lot of heavy lifting, for a lot other problems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Joe Biden broke up the rail strike and the democrats have a long history of weakening unions, this is the dumbest most ahistoric shit I've read yet.

    Im not gonna bother with the rest of your gish-gallop bullshit except to point out that Roe v. Wade was overturned under a democrat president and it was NEVER codified even when they had run on doing exactly that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Biden is pro union because he said so. /s Stop judging him by his actions. /s He lost reelection because of failing health. /s His appointee, Mrs. Harris, lost the election due to her laugh and not continuing his unpopular policies. /s

    Consider USAID as an example of a machine that keeps doing work regardless of the current office holders. Machines to crush children are part of the system. I acknowledge there were some good outcomes from US soft power. However, the child crushing machine continues to crush children even when the people actuating the lever change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    Democrats are, for the most part, pro union. They are the only ones supporting Medicare for all. They actually support science and education. They support social safety nets like social security and SNAP. They support gun regulations. They support foreign aid. They support safe access to abortions. They support LGBTQ rights.

    No they dont. They campaign on supporting these things, but when they have power, they don't do anything about them at best.

    When they had a majority under Biden and Obama, when did they set up Medicare for all? When did they codify abortion rights?

    And lets look at their foreign aid:

    • Support for genocide
    • Support for dictators
    • Support for warlords

    Life is demonstrably worse under republican policies for the working class.

    And life got demonstrably worse under democratic policies for the working class and for people living in other countries.

    Pretending like things will get better if we just let republicans win is not helping. They are literally turning the US into a fascist police state.

    When did I say that we should let republicans win? I'm pretty sure I never did. The democrats are helping the republicans turn the US into a fascist police state. Remember when Obama increased mass surveillance? Remember when Biden increased funding to the military, ICE, DHS, cops, and helped build out the border wall? Remember when they both mass-deported and tortured people?

    When one party is fine with me, if a little wary because I’m way further left than they are, and the other part literally wants to kill me and people like me, I see it as a pretty big difference.

    Well, that may be the difference between us. I'm pretty far to the left of the Democrats, because I think things like rape, torture, and murder are bad. I see both parties actively supporting those things happening to people like me, and people unlike me. But I guess that doesn't matter to you as long as they aren't going after you.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it