• @NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1736 months ago

    Sanders notably attributed the war in Gaza to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and “the right-wing Netanyahu government” — not to Israel in general.

    This extremely obvious distinction seems to get completely lost in every discussion on the topic. I like Israel and they have the right to exist. I don’t like far right conservative governments run by corrupt war criminals (but enough about Bush…).

    • @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      936 months ago

      Absolutely. Just like caring about the fate of innocent Palestinians doesn’t mean rooting for the Hamas terrorists. Another distinction a lot of bad faith actors conveniently ignore in order to shift the narrative.

    • @wandermind@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      396 months ago

      In part because there are people actively and deliberately muddying together the Netanyahu government and Israel (as well as Israel and Jews) so that any criticism of the actions of Israel or Netanyahu can be labeled “antisemitism”.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness
      link
      fedilink
      136 months ago

      I mean Netanyahu has been winning elections since 1996 (granted there was a gap in the middle) so the election is getting dubious.

          • @Serinus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            -36 months ago

            Okay, say Israel tomorrow turns the other cheek. They take down all checkpoints and allow free travel anywhere for anyone.

            How many Israelis die before the Palestinians decide they no longer “deserve” to die? Does Israel still exist in five years?

            • @Jordan_U@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              216 months ago

              This same argument has been made throughout history.

              “If we let Black people have freedom they’ll murder all of the white plantation owners!”

              Now, I wouldn’t blame formerly enslaved people for murdering the people who enslaved them, but that didn’t happen.

              Aparthide in South Africa was ended without the promised (by white people) “white genocide” either.

              Settler-colonial powers always think that the people they’re oppressing will commit genocide, because it’s what colonizers do.

              The only road to true peace is full human rights for all.

              • @Serinus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                66 months ago

                If there’s an argument that’s going to sway me, it’s the historical comparisons. I need to read more about how similar situations have ended in the past, even if a direct comparison probably isn’t fully accurate.

                I’m absolutely interested in a path to peace; I just don’t see one right now. I don’t think putting 100% of the burden of peace on Israel is reasonable or possible. Hamas still has over a hundred hostages (assuming they’re still alive).

                • NoneOfUrBusiness
                  link
                  fedilink
                  5
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I don’t think putting 100% of the burden of peace on Israel is reasonable or possible.

                  Israel is the one who singlehandedly built the current status quo, going as far as to fund Hamas and support them against the PNA.

                  Hamas still has over a hundred hostages (assuming they’re still alive).

                  Because hostages are one of the few ways Hamas can get concessions (including Palestinian political prisoners) out of Israel. If Hamas doesn’t have hostages Israel simply won’t stop.

            • @daltotron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              66 months ago

              why would anyone ever implement that hare brained scheme? most people that I’ve talked to just want an alternative to bombing the shit out of gaza and killing 21,000 people and like 8,000 kids or whatever, they’re not saying israel should immediately just like, dissolve, and all israelis should be left to die and shit. They probably wouldn’t even let themselves be killed, without a fight, you’d see something more like an impromtu military junta state crop up and increasing radicalization form among it and then on both sides, and you’d just get a repeat of what’s currently happening but probably worse. I don’t think that would ever reasonably happen, even, this is a dumb bullshit hypothetical. Even the people who want the dissolution of israel want it over the course of multiple years, or decades, even, where some jewish guy from staten island that doesn’t even speak hebrew goes back home, and everything just kind of goes back to what might be considered “normal”. The logical follow through of “I dislike it when a bunch of people are getting massacred” isn’t “well now I guess we can’t do anything at all, they can just march in and kill everyone and that’s it. woops. look at what you made us do!”. Most people recognize this, and just want the violence to stop as fast as possible, which is why nobody’s really talking about the long term plans for what might happen after this. They’re too focused on the horrible shit happening right now to propose anything.

        • NoIWontPickaName
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          That’s because israel are killing all of the women, children, israeli hostages, and israeli soldiers, they aren’t worried about Hamas fighters just quite yet.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I mean yes, October 7th targeted military targets first and foremost. Even if you blame all casualties on Hamas (which is very much wrong; Israel shelled their own citizens during the attack) you’re looking at a military casualty ratio of 33%.

        • @crappingpants@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -36 months ago

          “The sample size of this poll is 1231 adults, of whom 750 were interviewed face to face in the West Bank and 481 in the Gaza Strip in 121 randomly selected locations.” So 72% of only 1231 people is an accurate representation for the opinion of over 5.4 million people?

          https://pcpsr.org/en/node/963

    • 😈MedicPig🐷BabySaver😈
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      I don’t bother explaining when I comment, “Fuck Israel.” If people don’t realize that I’m referring to the government then I have zero to say to them.

    • @abuttandahalf@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      26 months ago

      Literally 1% of Israelis believe that Israel is using too much force in Gaza. The majority believes they are using too little. If Israelis had their way the genocide would be even deadlier than it is today. This is not a state or a society that should be allowed to exist in its current state. The state has to be dismantled to deprogram the fascism and genocidal ideology that it is built on and perpetuates. This is not going to happen peacefully because they refuse to let it happen peacefully, not because anyone wishes suffering on them sadistically. A system of oppression and murder that refuses to be dismantled nonviolently is going to be dismantled by force. That is the only just thing to be done and the responsibility for it lies on Israel wholly.

    • @Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      -136 months ago

      It’s very much Israel’s war, not Netanyahu. Bernie’s wrong. Isreal supports the war, not Netanyahu. Another Prime Minister might have made it worse.

        • @Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          136 months ago

          No, I’m not suggesting that. I’m suggesting the Israeli people back this war. It’s not Netanyahu’s war. I’m not so sure another Prime Minister would be any different, perhaps worse. Bernie is in a long line of people that don’t like Bibi. I’ve been there for years. But, there is no use dressing this thing up as one person’s fault.

          • @Kosmokomeno
            link
            116 months ago

            I would have killed myself in shame if I presided over israels national defense on Oct 7. Nothing has proven the utter stupidity of national sovereignty than watching the man retain power “to see through the war”

            All a commander in chief needs to do is fail to defend his country…and he has an excuse to stay in power. It encourages failure. It’s insane.

          • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            86 months ago

            No but it helps create a narrative that might allow Israel to get out of this saving face with a scape goat for their lust for genocide.

            The people of Israel are absolutely super excited for their new property every time they conquest but having a “wrong leader” that pushed them to do the atrocities means they can “dump him and turn to be better” and if they are lucky all the blame goes to the figurehead. Pretty classic play and if the people of Israel actually want peace one of the only outs they are gonna get.

    • @dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      276 months ago

      I mean yeah he actually wasn’t quick to denounce Israel’s genocide in Gaza. I am super happy he has come around but I think I’m the beginning he was reluctant to (not because he agreed with it, because he probably didn’t want to mess with Israeli money coming after him politically).

      • @Lazhward@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        46 months ago

        The more I learn about nuclear the less it makes sense. It’s a great source of energy but it’s complex and expensive to maintain. Solar, wind, hydro and geothermal are simple and becoming cheaper by the day. It’s hard to imagine a scenario in which we ever require more energy than those combined could provide.

        • @DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Solar and Wind can’t create a stable grid, you would need gas/coal backups.

          Hydro is fine but causes a lot of damage to river ecosystems and there is so much hydro you can build.

          Geothermal is probably best source of energy if you can get it but is only viable in few places.

      • @Reptorian@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        16 months ago

        There’s fusion on the work, so that alleviate some energy issues without nuclear energy and fossil fuels. And fusion might even have less problems, but I don’t know much about it.

        • @ChillPenguin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          The problem is fusion is always 20 years away. It’s essentially limitless energy if we can develop the technology and get it working. Also a lot of places have been moving away from nuclear.

          • @Welt@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            56 months ago

            Nuclear ain’t nuclear. Uranium fission plants allow for nuclear weapons proliferation. Thorium fission plants don’t melt down, don’t create radioactive waste, and even use uranium fission waste so there’s less remaining. It can’t be used for bombs though. Why do you think the great powers opted for uranium technology? Thorium fission is a viable option, but we should stop just saying “nuclear”.

  • @WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    646 months ago

    Military industrial complex goes BRRRRRRR while the oligarchy distracts you with yet another “most important election of your life” — forcing you to choose between fascist dystopia or neoliberal dystopia instead of … actually improving the planet and society for future generations.

  • @phx@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    496 months ago

    Yeah it’s hard to disagree with this. While I don’t think that the US or Canada can do much to influence the situation politically, neither should they be providing support militarily.

  • gary
    link
    fedilink
    216 months ago

    Stop funding terrorists, stop funding evil regimes, it’s not so hard

  • @BobGnarley@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    -66 months ago

    Wish he was actually someone who could win and not just a talking head with good points that will never be enacted by the government.

    • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      156 months ago

      He can win a fair election…

      It’s just to get to those you have to win a primary first.

      And as the DNC said in court, a primary is a private affair and they can influence as much as they want because at the end of the day the results don’t matter and they can nominate anyone.

      • @mydude@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        86 months ago

        I don’t understand why you guys don’t revolt. Like jeez. You say the French surrender easily, you guys have capitulated completely, without even one good stand.

        • xerazal
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          56 months ago

          As an American, I find it funny when I see other Americans shit on the French. Idk, when I think the French I think of the French revolution, which was bloody.

          The French did not fuck around when they had to get shit done, whereas we Americans bitch and moan but never do shit because idk, it’s inconvenient.

        • @BobGnarley@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          26 months ago

          They will actually shoot you here though especially if things got half as serious as they did in France about the pensions (which was awesome and I wish something similar would happen in the US to be honest).

        • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          26 months ago

          You say the French surrender easily

          Only people ignorant of history…

          America literally wouldn’t exist without the French backing us as a proxy war.

          And the reason the French surrendered in ww2 was the did most of the ww1 fighting and were caught by surprising. Its like how Nimrod was a mighty hunter for thousands of years, but one joke on a kids cartoon turned it into an insult.

          It wasn’t that the French always surrendered, it was notable because they never surrendered. So no one expected it.

  • GodlessCommie
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -206 months ago

    How brave to come forward with calls for no funding once the area has been cleansed. The apple didn’t fall too far from the neolib tree

    • @Dublin112@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      17
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Because we only have 2 parties in the US that currently have any chance to make office at that stage and Democrats are more in line with his view than Republicans. Many people from both sides really shouldn’t be in either party but since there are only 2 parties, everyone picks the side that most aligns with their ideas because it’s easier to get support for how they think the country should operate.

    • CheezyWeezle
      link
      fedilink
      156 months ago

      Um, what party do you think Bernie is a member of? He is pretty famously an independent…

      • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        26 months ago

        Lord knows, we heard it enough from clinton supporters during 2016 as justification for the party’s partiality towards her.