Sanders Introduces No War Against Iran Act
OBJECTION! @ Objection @lemmy.ml Posts 19Comments 1,655Joined 1 yr. ago
OBJECTION! @ Objection @lemmy.ml
Posts
19
Comments
1,655
Joined
1 yr. ago
You might have a point if the US were fighting in Ukraine, but… we’re not?
Yes, we're just sacrificing their lives for the realpolitic of weakening Russia, which is also bad.
we found by rummaging around in the pentagon’s couch cushions... it costs us almost nothing
Lmao, y'all actually believe this shit.
The US spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on the military, more than the next nine countries in the world combined. Every government program designed to actually help people gets cut to feed more money into the war machine. It's no wonder we have "military equipment between our couch cushions," because military equipment is what virtually all our tax money goes towards, when it's the reason we can't have things like free healthcare or higher education. Notice how we never seem to find money between our couch cushions for those things?
what used to be considered our biggest opponent
Did it? Who considered the Russian Federation a bigger opponent than the PRC?
is teetering on the brink of cultural and economic collapse
Looked in a mirror lately? The US just elected Trump, in part because people think he represents an alternative to the disastrous establishment policies that pour endless money into pointless foreign wars, and to an economy that is working for fewer and fewer people. Seems like "on the brink of cultural collapse" describes the US to a T.
But moreover, the whole American Empire is falling apart around us. Every year, more and more countries that are just as significant as Ukraine are choosing to make deals with China, to start trading and cooperating with them instead of us. Because the US is trying to rule the world through force and intimidation, while China is manufacturing consumer goods and building hospitals and infrastructure for developing and middle-income countries - the things we won't even build domestically. Who would want to side with us when you can look at our domestic situation and see that it's declining and awful? If that's the best we can provide our own citizens, then what could we offer to other countries?
If I were an "accelerationist," like people sometimes baselessly accuse me of, I would 100% support spending more on the military and getting involved in these stupid unwinnable conflicts all over the world, dumping endless amounts of money towards any situation we can use bombs and not sparing a penny for actually making anyone's life better, because those self-destructive policies will ensure the downfall of the US more than anything else could. The problem with that being, the US is likely to start WWIII in that scenario, the more clear it becomes that the military is literally the only tool that we could possibly use to maintain hegemony, since it's the only thing we spend money on.
I will concede that if your assumption that the military defeat of Israel would necessarily mean the deaths of millions of Jewish civilians, then you might have a point. Although, it isn't true, and you don't.
I'll also concede not blocking you, at least for now. But I have no interest in continuing this conversation, regardless.
Your homework assignment is to find someone, literally any one person, from anywhere, of any political persuasion, who agrees with the statement "Iran is just as Zionist as Israel." Literally anyone. I don't care if it's your mom.
When you fail to do so, come back and say, "I'm sorry, @Objection@lemmy.ml, you were right and I was wrong, I clearly don't understand this situation, but I would like to learn more about it from you."
If you reply to this comment with anything other than, "I did find someone who agrees with that statement" or the thing I just said, I will block you.
I have no idea what that thought is even doing in an imperialist’s brain.
Making occasional anti-war gestures and comments muddies the water enough for Libertarian-minded types to support him. It's the same reason Biden occasionally criticized Netanyahu, it's all theater.
It's also a great opportunity for Russia to starve the US economy by getting them involved in conflicts it cannot economically support. And the US is far more overextended due to other conflicts.
Good topics for you to look into, I'm done doing your homework.
Yeah, the military's job is to point guns at people when they're going to the grocery store in other countries, primarily.
It's very important for soldiers to focus on doing "important work to defend our nation" (murdering brown kids) and that they're "productive at their jobs" (bombing hospitals)
Im just demonstrating “zionism” didnt become “zionism” until the jews acted on their belief that they had a claim to some land. Just as the Palestinians believe they have a claim to some land, religious or otherwise. Some guy deemed the Jewish zionism “zionism” from some other meaning just as a Palestinian “zionism” could be claimed.
This is utterly insane. That's not what the word means, at all. Zionism isn't "anytime someone has a claim to some land," JFC.
What does it even matter, youre now arguing that zionism could exist with out the displacement or death of the Palestinian people.
Wrong. I'm arguing that the death of displacement of Palestinians is not part of the definition of Zionism. In practice, that is what it entails. Learn to read.
How is that wrong in a region strictly inhabited by other ethnostates? Hell, you even argue Iran, an ethnostate, is justified in attacking isreal.
Iran is not an ethnostate, nor is it committing genocide, and it's "attacks" are retaliation for Israel's unprovoked aggression.
I'm not interested in discussing this further with you until you either educate yourself and can actually defend your views from an informed position, or until you stop trying to attack my views from a position of complete and utter ignorance, where you say such nonsense as "Zionism is whenever anyone claims any land."
When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense.
You realize that still supports my definition and not yours, right? Where in that definition does it say anything about killing Palestinians, as you assert is part of what Zionism is defined by?
What's the point of telling you to investigate if when you investigate and find proof that you're wrong, you simply keep asserting that the evidence proves you right? Maybe you should just stop speaking entirely, at that point.
You cant tell me my definition of zionism is wrong then tell me your made up definition of zionism is right.
Lmao, my definition of Zionism is not "made up." Here's what came up when I googled "Zionism definition:"
Zionism is a political movement that supports the self-determination and statehood for the Jewish people in their ancestral homeland, the land of Israel. It encompasses both the historical desire for a Jewish homeland and the modern-day efforts to develop and sustain the State of Israel.
Fucking dumbass, maybe learn basic terms and facts about the situation before trying to weigh in with your ignorant drivel.
No investigation, no right to speak.
Zionists, they believe in deconstructing palistine by force. Am I wrong, what is it youre really against zionism or Jewish zionism?
Wtf would "non-Jewish Zionism" even be? This is utterly incoherent, your definitions are completely wrong.
Zionism means supporting the continued existence of a Jewish ethnostate in occupied Palestine. In practice, this means supporting the genocide of Palestinians because that's what the vast majority of Israelis want. But it does not definitionally require supporting further aggression against Palestinians.
Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran are not liberarors.
Maybe not, but they are literally the only check against Israel's genocide, currently.
Would you say that Stalin was a liberator, btw? Because either way, he sure did a lot to stop the Nazis.
South Africa made policy possible through strategy.
This is meaningless nonsense, you're just stringing words together.
By your logic your tantamount to a zionist because you cannot demonstrate how isreal will ever be deconstructed other then by force, death, destruction.
That's idiotic. I support deconstructing Israel through force, therefore, I am clearly not a Zionist. You do not support deconstructing Israel at all, therefore, you are a Zionist. This is very straightforward logic.
D-day the allied forces attacked a genocidal expansionist state beginning the liberation of France. Who are the allied forces that will liberate palistine?
The same sort of coalition of the willing. The previous Nazis were so bad they got Churchill and Stalin fighting on the same team.
Right now, Hamas, Ansarallah, and Iran seem like the Zionazis' biggest opponents. Hopefully, in time, more will join in opposition.
South Africa was liberated through civil disobedience. That is the South African model.
You're treating tactics for achieving a policy as inseparable from the policy itself, which they're obviously not.
I prefer likely solutions that can be executed without large human tolls. That and generations long projects that methodically deconstruct oppressive societies and replaces oppression with liberty.
Pick one. Because if the Zionist entity is allowed to continue existing for the duration of a "generations long project," then there will, necessarily, be "large human tolls," like, virtually every Gazan, if not every Palestinian.
What would've happened if, instead of directly confronting and abolishing the Nazi state through force, people had followed your advice of waiting for a "generations long project" to effect change? How many more millions would've died?
Justice delayed is justice denied. The longer you kick the can down the road, the longer Israel gets to continue with it's genocidal aims freely.
Har har. You got it all figured out.
Yes, I do. Zionism means that you support the continued existence of the state of Israel as a Jewish ethnostate, which you obviously do. You've talked yourself into a corner that the only possible way you could not be a zionist (as you claim) is if you support the death of millions of Jews, which you claim is an inevitable consequence of it no longer existing.
Tell me, what happened on D-day?
A genocidal, expansionist ethnostate was successfully and heroically attacked, beginning the liberation of France.
Tell me, what happens when isreal is under the rule of an islamic government?
I already told you. Look at South Africa, as an example. It's not as if wiping an apartheid state off the map hasn't been done before, and obviously any negative consequences that resulted from that change were better than the status quo.
Which do you prefer: a negative peace which is the absence of tension or a positive peace which is the presence of justice?
That’s a trivial naive understanding of the situation but you do you.
All I did was quote you. That's your understanding of the situation. It's not my fault you don't know what the word "zionist" means.
America isnt storming tel aviv either
You're the only one who's said anything about this idea too, lol.
You're not a zionist? But literally in the same comment you say that the destruction of the apartheid state of Israel would necessarily mean "the death/displacement of millions of Jewish people." If you don't support the existence of Israel, yet the only alternative to Israel's existence is the death/displacement of millions of Jewish people, then logically that means you support the death/displacement of millions of Jewish people.
Seems kinda antisemitic if you ask me. Like, all I want is for Palestinians to have equal rights, if you want millions of Jews to die that's on you.
The same way D-Day was harm reduction. This isn't complicated lmao.
I know you're not actually a pacifist since you're a zionist, quit playing dumb.
Sorry, I thought you meant what you asked, "What does the destruction of the apartheid state look like" and not the entirely different question, "By what means can the destruction of the apartheid state be achieved?"
The effects of the end of apartheid South Africa are the same that we aim for with the end of Israel. Unfortunately, Israel appears to only understand the language of force, and so that is the most likely means of achieving those ends.
That's like saying that the only way to defeat Nazi Germany is to convince the Germans through civil disobedience, because "Germany and France are separate entities."
Israel is a puppet of the US, not the other way around.