Democrats and Republicans are both in the pockets of AIPAC : usa

[-] [email protected] 5 points 15 hours ago

The illusion of choice, whoever you vote for, Israel will always come first.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 17 hours ago

It's shitty, but you will get one of them in power, and it's encumbent on you to vote for the obvious lesser of two evils.

If you like the Greens (or whoever else's) policies, work to fight for them the other 1,458 days of the election cycle - polling day is for buying a few more years of moribund US democracy - not for pissing away your vote and letting the fascists in.

[+] [email protected] -10 points 16 hours ago

I don’t vote for genociders and you shouldn’t either. Voting for genocide es makes you as evil as they are.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 15 hours ago

You keep telling people not to tell you who to vote for

Stop telling me who to vote for 😘

[-] [email protected] -4 points 15 hours ago

Of course I am going to keep telling people not to vote for a genocider. What is wrong with you?!

Your “freedom” to vote does not extent to be permitted to just ethnic cleanse millions of people.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 14 hours ago

I recognize your anger, I am also distraught about Palestine and I wish we had a candidate who was adamant about not giving more aid to Israel. I'm not saying you need to give up on your ideals nor am I telling you to shut up about it. But let's be real here, as much as we hate it, we only have 2 choices in November, and one of them will cause much MUCH more damage to Palestinians, Americans, and quite possibly the entire globe if he gets elected. We CANNOT let Trump win, so again, as much as I don't like many of Kamala's stances, she is undeniably receiving my vote

[-] [email protected] 5 points 14 hours ago

One of them is also much less competent and intelligent, which means he's more likely to fuck things up and cause a US/Israel loss.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 13 hours ago

Theoretically, sure, it's possible. I think what's more likely to happen if Trump fucks up is that Israel will just keep up the attack maybe with slightly less support. It's not like they are a U.S. State that has to abide by a SCOTUS decision; they are (for good and bad) their own sovereign nation and ~~could~~ WOULD MOST LIKELY make the choice to continue their abhorrent actions, regardless of whatever Trump himself might do.

The state of Israel is not a "puppet" of the U.S., only able to make a movement when given a command from the White House; it is closer to Frankenstein's Monster, fully capable of making its own decisions, and sometimes they choose to do evil things (regardless of how 'justified' they tell themselves it is). It's not a 1-to-1 comparison, but I think it's a better way to understand the whole situation

[-] [email protected] 4 points 12 hours ago

An Israel with less support is one that is in more danger of inviting retaliation from its neighbors.

Of particular interest to me is Egypt, which only cooperates with Israel because of the US. e

[-] [email protected] 0 points 12 hours ago

I mean, you're not wrong, but again, it's extremely unlikely that Israel/US relations sour SO bad that the US wouldn't step in and help defend an Israel under assault. Again, it's theoretically possible but very unlikely. Plus, what you said is true regardless of who wins in November, which was my original point

[-] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago

I don't see relations souring under Trump, per se, but I do see him fucking up the careful balancing act in that region.

Furthermore, Israel is becoming so unpopular in the US that direct intervention would destabilize the country.

If the goal is defeating the US/Israel then electing an incompetent and unpopular president is not a bad result at all.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 7 hours ago

I still argue that a second Trump presidency would lead to worse outcomes for everyone involved, perhaps even the entire global population, than a Harris presidency.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

I think a successful Trump presidency would be worse for people all around the world.

I do not predict success. I think his presidency will be a disaster.

But ultimately it comes down to how we respond. He won't fail unless he's defeated by a mass movement against his presidency.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago

True, but why not post a link to an article from a reputable source than just a low-effort image?

[-] [email protected] 45 points 1 day ago

There not even being vague about it.

“WE ENCOURAGE the U.S. government to enact specific policies that create a strong, enduring and mutually beneficial relationship with our ally Israel.”

https://www.aipac.org/

How is that not foreign election interference?

At what point can we just call it and say the USA is an asset of Israel?

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Israel does not own the US, the US allows AIPAC to exist to maintain its own interest among congresspeople (etc.). Only one of them is existentially dependent on their working together, and it's not the US (though the US massively benefits).

[-] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

The US and Israel are part of the same joint imperial project.

Do you think AIPAC can operate without permission?

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

If ever a site begged to be hacked with pictures of war crimes....

Although it wouldn't do shit for those demons

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nah, Israel is just the 51st state. It is part of the USA by this point. It just wants preferential treatment.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

We fund Israel so much more than any other state. Imagine if all that money went towards public infrastructure in the US instead

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Wow. I guess we all just need to start a human rights company and then we’d be golden.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago

Absolutely hilarious to watch Americans bleat about Russian interference when this goes on completely in the open.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

I can be mad about two things.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Sure, but one thing is a way bigger problem than the other. Meanwhile, the media ignores the elephant in the room.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 6 hours ago

Russia is much more dangerous to us than Israel is

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

You can't talk about that elephant without being called an "antisemite".

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Pretty much yeah.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

#bothsides

[-] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

Yup, and with good reason. Thanks "Citizen's United!"

https://www.commondreams.org/news/progressives-lose-oregon-primaries

https://apnews.com/article/cori-bush-aipac-house-race-missouri-568c1a84974b8ba176a8d27a8375de42

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/26/the-aipac-funded-candidate-defeated-jamaal-bowman-but-at-what-cost

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2024-08-07/ty-article/another-victory-for-aipac-wesley-bell-and-8-5-million-defeat-squad-member-cori-bush/00000191-2adb-d2a9-a5dd-3edb30180001

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

I used to think lobby groups are influential in determining the outcome of these elections but I think the reality is they align themselves with candidates that are slated to more likely win. Sometimes they even fund both candidates. Money just doesn't seem to translate to effective victory. Look at Bloomberg in 2016. That guy spent an ungodly amount of money on his campaign - - - more than all the candidates combined or something close.

Cory Bowman was already waning in popularity. From your article:

Bowman had several compounding low-level mistakes and scandals that could easily be hammered home to voters, like pulling the fire alarm at the Capitol or his controversial hip-hop lyrics. Beyond that, Latimer is a popular politician who has represented most of the district’s voters for years. Add in more money than any group has ever spent on a congressional primary by an enormous margin, and you have the conditions for a win.

I think it all depends. I'm not saying AIPAC is not influential. I just don't think it's so clear cut. I think the money in more to get access. The reality is Israel is popular with boomers, and Dem boomers vote. We are starting to see a shift with younger voters but it's just not there yet.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

I think the money in more to get access

Access to what and for what purpose?

[-] [email protected] 0 points 14 hours ago

Access to influence policy and legislation. But they seem to get mixed results. There have been a few studies that looked at the actual effects of lobbying. I may have to dig around but i can track them down. It's very interesting because it upturned what my assumptions were about lobbying.

It seems they find candidates that are already somewhat aligned and work no push the scale further. Like, someone like Latimer wouldn't need a lot to push the scale in favor of AIPAC objectives.

It's very interesting to read up on this.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

It certainly goes some way to explain why lobbyists buy politicians for pennies in the grand scheme of things, but ultimately you're saying the same thing with a different inflection.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago

Correct

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

@Confidant6198 youtu.be/ZLIPUDlRBFA?si=FPCXCV…

United States | News & Politics