“Israel’s far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has ordered preparations for the annexation of the occupied West Bank ahead of US President-elect Donald Trump taking office in January 2025.”
For the American voters to make sure it sinks in.
But Harris was responsible of this genocide!!! Turd said he would solve the war in a day!!!1!!1!!111!one!!1
And that's actually true. He'd just let Israel complete the genocide.
The Harris campaign made the decision to not break from Biden on Israel, at the cost of a +6 points gain. That's the fault of the campaign's calculations to ignore those voters, take them for granted, and instead run to the right with Liz Cheney and having the most lethal Military.
I voted for Harris and told others to do the same. It's still on the campaign. Blaming voters is just sowing division when we need unity and solidarity to fight against Fascism.
Quote
Our first matchup tested a Democrat and a Republican who “both agree with Israel’s current approach to the conflict in Gaza”. In this case, the generic candidates tied 44–44. The second matchup saw the same Republican facing a Democrat supporting “an immediate ceasefire and a halt of military aid and arms sales to Israel”. Interestingly, the Democrat led 49–43, with Independents and 2020 non-voters driving the bulk of this shift.
Quotes
In Pennsylvania, 34% of respondents said they would be more likely to vote for the Democratic nominee if the nominee vowed to withhold weapons to Israel, compared to 7% who said they would be less likely. The rest said it would make no difference. In Arizona, 35% said they’d be more likely, while 5% would be less likely. And in Georgia, 39% said they’d be more likely, also compared to 5% who would be less likely.
Quotes
Quotes
Quotes
Majorities of Democrats (67%) and Independents (55%) believe the US should either end support for Israel’s war effort or make that support conditional on a ceasefire. Only 8% of Democrats but 42% of Republicans think the US must support Israel unconditionally.
Republicans and Independents most often point to immigration as one of Biden’s top foreign policy failures. Democrats most often select the US response to the war in Gaza.
Let's be honest, I voted for Harris. But her message was essentially:
"Vote for Kamala Harris. She will enable a slow genocide. But her opponent, Donald Trump, will enable a fast genocide. She is clearly the superior choice."
Saying that Kamala would be better than Trump was objectively true. However, it was also just shit, brain-dead, zero-awareness messaging. You cannot practically run on a message of, "yes, I will enable genocide, but my opponent will enable it WORSE!"
It's just a shit, poorly thought out message. Who actually is this for? Those pro-Zionist voters won't be persuaded either way. Those who want to see the Palestinians genocided will go with Trump instead, as he'll get the job done faster. Those opposed to genocide were asked to hold their nose and vote for someone who should be on trial at the Hague, simply because she was running against someone who deserves to be on trial at the Hague even more!
It's like running a campaign saying, "yes, I have some Nazi tendencies, but my opponent is a full-on avowed Nazi. My opponent is objectively worse."
A statement can be true, while also being just complete shit in terms of campaign strategy.
"Yes, my candidate is Mussolini, but her opponent is Hitler! Clearly a vote for Mussolini is better than a vote for Hitler!"
"Yes, my candidate is Mussolini, but her opponent is Hitler! Clearly a vote for Mussolini is better than a vote for Hitler!"
Why would you be criticising Mussolini if you didn't secretly want Hitler to win?! I cannot possibly come up with any other explanation. You must be trying to trick us.
Can we finally stop pretending that Israel is an "ally." I consider the state of Israel to be an enemy to the general American public.
The general American public just voted in favor of this. The alliance will only be strengthend under Trump.
That doesn't change my opinion. That alliance is to the U.S. government, not to the U.S. people. I consider them to be a hostile entity.
Okay, but they can't be an enemy of the american public if that same public votes for a president that supports Israel and its genocide.
Don't know what to tell you. I'm expressing my opinion on how I personally see them, which is an entity that is openly hostile to the American public.
People voting for them doesn't negate this. It only means that people vote against their own self-interests, which is nothing new as we've seen time and time again.
Narrowing down the options to apartheid/genocide and the abolition of the Jewish character of Israel. In other words killing off the last vestiges of a non-fascist version of Zionism that a "small Israel" could allow.
So, liberal Zionists: which side are you on?
Dude I gave up the moment I heard on the radio that the fucker killed Rabin. If you want to live in Zion move to New York.
...also, to the rest of the thread: If you think the US election was decided on Israel, please go outside and touch grass. Talk to people. You know, those flesh-and blood things usually found within metal containers on rubber circles that you rarely interact with. Ask them. Practically nobody in the US gives a fuck, and especially not enough of a fuck for it to be the #1 cause of things.
If you want to live in Zion move to New York.
I am absolutely not a Zionist, but this is kind of a shitty thing to say.
https://www.oed.com/dictionary/jew-york_n?tl=true
The answer to "if you want to live in Zion" is "too bad."
New York is host to the second most populous Jewish community, after Tel Aviv, before Jerusalem. That's a fact, not some antisemitic conspiracy theory.
And now you stand here, introducing a derogatory term because... noone said it? What's your intention? Make it more popular? Imply that the sentiment against Jewish New York would be any worse than existing sentiment against Israel? One has quaint strings up power poles and plenty of bagels, the other a genocidal maniac and convicted terrorist as minister of national security, I don't think there's a competition to be had, there.
The answer to “if you want to live in Zion” is “too bad.”
...or is it that you don't want any more Jews in NYC?
I didn't say that it was a conspiracy theory. I said suggesting that New York is "Zion" just because of its Jewish population is a bad thing to say and I showed you the reason why.
…or is it that you don’t want any more Jews in NYC?
I'm a Jew. I'm a even mod of c/Jewish.
Nice try though.
bUt iT DoEsN'T mAtTEr tHey ArE BoTh EqUalLy BaD On pALeStiNe
I mean, aren't they? The only real difference I can see between Kamala and Trump on Palestine is that Kamala prefers a more respectable version of genocide. She supports genocide, but she just wants it to be done slowly and quietly. Trump is on board with a fast and overt genocide. Their policies lead to the same outcome; Trump is just a lot more honest about it.
Harris promised to do everything in her power to end the war in Gaza.
“This year has been difficult, given the scale of death and destruction in Gaza and given the civilian casualties and displacement in Lebanon, it is devastating. And as president, I will do everything in my power to end the war in Gaza, to bring home the hostages, end the suffering in Gaza, ensure Israel is secure, and ensure the Palestinian people can realise their right to dignity, freedom, security and self-determination,” Harris said to applause during a rally in East Lansing city of Michigan, home to 200,000 Arab Americans.
Wow, they are really going to do it, aren't they?
they've been self-defensing their way towards the total elimination and annexation of Palestine from the 1940s to now.
this whole thing really should not surprise anyone that knows even a simplified history of god's special country. they have been slowly and steadily inching towards their goal. they're not really shy about it.
hear it from Israel's first prime minister
"You are no doubt aware of the JNF's activity in this respect. Now a transfer of a completely different scope will have to be carried out. In many parts of the country new settlement will not be possible without transferring the Arab fellahin." He added: "Jewish power [in Palestine], which grows steadily, will also increase our possibilities to carry out this transfer on a large scale."
"With compulsory transfer we have a vast area... I support compulsory transfer. I don't see anything immoral in it."
Here's another guy, a director of the JNF, Joseph Weitz
"There is no way besides transferring the Arabs from here to the neighboring countries, and to transfer all of them, save perhaps for [the Arabs of] Bethlehem, Nazareth and Old Jerusalem. Not one village must be left, not one [Bedouin] tribe. And only after this transfer will the country be able to absorb millions of our brothers and the Jewish problem will cease to exist. There is no other solution."
They've already BEEN doing it. And this was the critical failure of all those who argued that Trump would be better for Palestine than Harris. I voted for Harris, but I am not at all surprised this cost her the election.
Israel doesn't need to do ANYTHING differently to complete its genocide of Gaza and the West Bank. It is already on that road, actively engaging in a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Palestinians. And the Biden/Harris team have, through their inaction, fully endorsed this genocide.
Kamala was so comically bad on Palestine that the only hair-brained thing they could come up with to defend her stance was, "well...well...Trump will let the Israelis do a genocide EVEN FASTER!"
Kamala's campaign slogan was, "a vote for Mussolini is better than a vote for Hitler!"
And then she was surprised when enough liberal voters in swing states stayed home to cost her the election. It turns out, there are plenty of people who will NOT turn out to vote for Mussolini just because Hitler is also on the ballot. They won't vote for either of them; they'll just say "a pox on both your houses!" and stay home.
Is a vote for Mussolini better than a vote for Hitler? Objectively, probably yes. Hitler objectively did a lot worse harm than Mussolini. But you also can't be shocked when people refuse to hold their noses and vote for Mussolini, just because Hitler might be objectively worse. Ultimately, it's your fucking fault for expecting people to vote for Mussolini.
They've been signaling it for more than a year now.
Are you surprised?
What does annexation actually mean? Do all the Palestinians get Israel citizenship and voting rights? Or is this officially implementing apartheid or expulsion/death?
I'm no diplomat but having the government officially annex it sure seems like an escalation. Many (most?) of those settlements are illegal even under Israeli law* so the way to legitimize them is to annex the territory, because "it doesn't have a government now".
* According to Wikipedia, Israel's Supreme court has said repeatedly (until 2012 at least) that the settlements are illegal, apparently against the word of the Executive branch of the government. And then last year, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli_judicial_reform
But but but, i didn't vote for Kamala because she wouldn't do exactly as I wanted for the Palestinians! Things should be getting better for them, not worse, how could this be happening?
Silver lining we'll soon get to know if the Scriptures are right about that second coming of Christ. If all the believer could just fuck off to heaven, the heathens might get some peace.
It's already annexed unofficially
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
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.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/