• riseuppikmin [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Actions are more important than words. The U.S. is going out of its way to expedite the artillery needed to continue Israel’s indiscriminate bombing of civillians in its ongoing genocidal campaign against Palestinians.

        Please I am begging you do not take these organizations at face value- read what the poster above you sent and recognize the distance between the statement “You need to comply with international law more closely” and the action: here is a way for us to get you bombs for you to use more quickly.

        If on one hand part of the state apparatus is signaling for “restraint” but the state is accelerating its ability to provide weapons that its calling for restraint in use of the actual stance is clear: what you’re doing is fine by the state.

        • ex10n@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s alright, we can agree to disagree. Biden has criticized the Netanyahu government for their treatment of Palestinians. More should be done to ensure their safety, hence the conditial provisions of arms, but the United States policy stance has clear ambitions for a 2 state solution. Neither Hamas, nor the Netantahu government are okay with this, however it remains the United States ambition. I truly hope we can see this conflict resolved in my lifetime.

          • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            You still haven’t been able to back up your claim that the USA is putting the breaks on it’s aid of Isreal because of the genocide. All you’ve done is point to the US going “we’d like it if you slowed down on the genocide, but we’ll 100 support you if you don’t” and tried to equivocate that as being the same, when it really isn’t.

            • ex10n@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              I said pumping the breaks. There’s still legitimate concern for the removal of Hamas as the acting government of Gaza. Neither Hamas, nor the Netantahu backed Israeli government want a 2 state solution, however this remains the US states policy. Whoever can broker a deal that affirms a 2 state solution here will hopefully produce meaningful change towards this conflict.

              • brain_in_a_box [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                I said pumping the breaks

                Doesn’t change anything about my point.

                There’s still legitimate concern for the removal of Hamas as the acting government of Gaza

                Incorrect. And you don’t see the USA sending endless, unconditional, military aid to Palestine so they can remove the Israeli government.

                Neither Hamas, nor the Netantahu backed Israeli government want a 2 state solution

                Hamas explicitly calls for a 2 state solution you lying ghoul.

                this remains the US states policy

                Not true, not until the US recognises the state of Palestine.

                Whoever can broker a deal that affirms a 2 state solution here will hopefully produce meaningful change towards this conflict.

                Going to be pretty hard to do while Isreal and the USA are committed to genocide.

            • ex10n@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              As far as I’m aware, the US has not fired any weapons on Gaza soil. There’s been some defensive strikes to the north in Lebanon, but that’s it. Seems like a stretch to call the United States complicit when it’s goals do not align with the Netantahu government.

                • ex10n@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Sounds like we can agree to disagree, there’s nothing wrong with that when democracy reigns!

                • ex10n@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Vetoing a ceasefire in an active war does not change states policy and actions, but you can spin this however you’d like and we can agree to disagree. There’s nothing wrong with disagreement, it just spurs the need for thoughtful discourse.

                  • The US could have ended it 2 months ago, but instead it sends weapons and stops any international attempt at stopping it. It is complicit and all the resistance groups across the Middle East agree. US interests in the Middle East and military are legitimate targets. We can agree to disagree, but the US government will be held accountable for its war crimes.

          • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Did anyone ever tell you the saying “actions speak louder than words” as a kid? Now apply that to state actors. No matter what words their US uses, no matter their criticism, their actions are very clear.