154
The US is complicit in Israel's campaign of genocide against children of Gaza
(www.middleeasteye.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
154 points (77.5% liked)
World News
32359 readers
358 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
We don't have an antiwar party anymore, that ended with Obama's first term. God forbid you don't vote for either of the war mongering parties though, then the US voters will tell you you're the problem.
We've never had an anti war party
We used to have anti-war politicians that were just called democrats, now anti-war is progressive it keeps being pushed further outside of the political binary. Whatever we did have is being chipped away.
Oh? Which dems were anti war?
Dennis Kucinich
Ah yeah true
John Kerry is probably the most notable one, they even ran him as their presidential candidate in 04. Whens the last time you heard any democrat nearly as high up as a president candidate even talk about war in any capacity other than some 'support our troops' line.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Skull_and_Bones_members
Uhh okay?
Dems were never anti-war. The US has never been anti-war. The US is a settler state just like Israel.
What does that mean though, "anti-war party," "anti-war politician"?
Did your "anti-war party" stop being so because they'd ended the war we were in? And if so, wasn't that a good thing, for those with an "anti-war" outlook?
Back in the late 1930s, I'm pretty sure America's "anti-war party" was mostly isolationists and some Nazi sympathizers. It was FDR, one of the most progressive Democrats ever elected to the office, who led the country to war back then.
If your entire political belief system is based on avoiding war at all costs, you deny yourself any real-world context in exchange for that purist ideology.
Those who are anti-war above all else lose everything they have and everything they stand for, the first time someone (anyone!) else decides to threaten them with war. The first time that someone sneak-attacks their Pearl Harbor, or crashes planes into their Twin Towers, or whatever else.
Maybe war is like abortion (in this singularly metaphorical political sense). Nobody ever really wants it to happen, and most people do their best to try to avoid it for themselves and others. Yet sometimes, despite everyone's best efforts, it ends up being the safest and healthiest way, sometimes the only way, out of an untenable situation not completely of our own making.
I'm not arguing that World War II was a "good" war and that W. Bush's Iraq was a "bad" war. That may comport with my personal beliefs, but my real point is that everyone has their own personal beliefs. Everyone has something that is most important to them.
If you say that war is never justified for any reason, then you are also saying that your call for pacifism is more important than whatever the reason for the war may be. Not just more important for you, but for everyone else too.
Problem is usually wars are justified by money or lies or politics, not by things like "defending democracy" or "stopping a genocide"
Those justifications are usually made up at the time it becomes convenient or politically necessary to enter a war.
Hot take but you’re right and you should say it. Being ‘anti-war’ is what has led to people to say that Ukraine should just give up and the US shouldn’t be aiding them in protecting themselves. Sometimes war is justified, though it should be minimized as much as possible
Too long, didn't read