194
submitted 1 week ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Mike Huckabee suggested any future Palestinian state should be carved out of ‘a Muslim country’

Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, has said that the US is no longer pursuing the goal of an independent Palestinian state, marking what analysts describe as the most explicit abandonment yet of a cornerstone of US Middle East diplomacy.

Asked during an interview with Bloomberg News if a Palestinian state remains a goal of US policy, he replied: “I don’t think so.”

The former Arkansas governor chosen by Donald Trump as his envoy to Israel went further by suggesting that any future Palestinian entity could be carved out of “a Muslim country” rather than requiring Israel to cede territory.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] triptrapper@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago

1 million upvotes for you. "Hope you're happy Trump got elected. Palestine is doing great now" etc. is such a tired cliche at this point. I'm astonished that it gets upvoted every. single. time. Harris literally said she wouldn't do anything different from Biden. She would have allowed/financed the genocide all the same, but she'd be calling the "tragic loss of life" a "very complex issue." I have no idea where this fantasy comes from that she would suddenly be the hero who stands up to Israel.

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

She would have been better for the world as a whole than Trump. If you truely think that things would have played out exactly the same in Gaza with Harris as POTUS, then it still comes down to two candidates last November, and every person knew that one of them would win. So a vote for Trump, a non vote, or a third party vote directly benefited Trump.

"Oh but I voted against genocide", fuck no you didn't. You voted in a manner that directly put Trump in charge, which was the worst possible outcome.

[-] hark@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

It could be argued that trump is actually better for the world (but not for the US) since he's ruining the US's soft power by tearing up alliances and expressing blatant corruption, making the US look incompetent and completely untrustworthy. Now other countries are finding alternatives, making the US not as central as it used to be. He is perhaps the most effective tool in helping the US empire fall.

You could also argue that this is accelerationism, but to be fair, democrats take advantage of accelerationism all the time (e.g. "republicans have repealed reproductive rights, donate even more money to us so we can fight it" while letting things get worse and worse, barely putting up a fight to make long-lasting changes and indeed letting things get this bad so they can position themselves as the only "solution").

[-] BassTurd@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

All, unfortunately, true.

Edit: Unfortunate for us in the US, not necessarily unfortunate for the rest of the world in some aspects. I still think as a whole his influence and other actions probably still make him worse for the world, but there is a valid argument about nations growing less dependent on the US.

Hopefully in 3.5 years (or please God, less), the US will be knocked down a peg on the world stage, other nations have a more diverse and stable trade relationships, and maybe Trump's actions will help spark other countries into action against hard right politics to prevent the same thing from happening to them. Ideally, this could be a catalyst for positive change, but I'm not holding my breath.

[-] triptrapper@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

To be clear, I voted for Harris, and I implored everyone I know to vote for Harris, for exactly the reasons you mentioned. I will always vote for the farthest-left candidate in the general, full-stop. I'm not arguing that both sides are the same, or that Harris wouldn't have been a better choice for 100 reasons outside of the genocide issue. I'm arguing that Harris gave no indication that she would defend Palestine or even recognize the genocide at all. She might well have done those things, but she didn't campaign on that, so I don't know why anyone is defending her on the issue. Establishment Dems can't seem to get it through their heads that progressive policies are popular, so we keep getting general elections between an absolute monster and a neolib Dem saying, "Vote for me or you'll get the monster!" That might be the reality, but it's not a platform.

I live in a blue state, and I had people around me arguing that whether they voted third-party or didn't vote at all, they would be able to sleep at night knowing that A. they didn't vote for genocide and B. the state would go blue anyway. I don't agree with that position at all. I want third parties to be represented in the US, but that starts at the local level and in the primaries. By the general election it's too late and we realistically have two options. I also believe that shutting down any criticism of the Dem candidate (e.g. a now-banned user told me to kill myself) is a good way to alienate people and discourage them from engaging with the process at all. The right has banned nuance from their discourse, and I refuse to allow the same thing to happen around me.

this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
194 points (97.1% liked)

World News

47636 readers
1493 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS