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…).
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.
Absolutely.
There are essentially 4 groups that need to be discussed here. The governments of Palestine and Israel, and the civilians of Palestine and Israel.
The governments are both murderous monsters who feed off of each other to fuel their hatred and justify genocide.
The civilians are the Innocents being killed and displaced.
This is not a black and white issue though, that is to say: not all civilians are innocent, and not all officials are monsters
Fuck me, real world is hard =/
Don’t just discount that both populations are supporting their respective governments
One side has a leader with 30% of the vote and the other side hasn’t voted for 20 years…
Despite the devastation, 57% of respondents in Gaza and 82% in the West Bank believe Hamas was correct in launching the October attack
Six days into the aerial attack on Gaza, 84 percent of the Israeli public supports Operation Pillar of Defense, with 12 percent opposing it
One of your polls is from 2012, wtf… You’re pulling these out of your ass.
Do you think it changed after the october attack?
Respondents were asked to what extent Israel should take into consideration the suffering of the civilian population in Gaza when planning the continuation of the fighting there. Forty-one percent of the Jewish respondents said “to a fairly small extent,” and 40 percent, “to a very small extent.”
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20231220_05/
Feel free to cite sources to the contrary though
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”.
I mean Netanyahu has been winning elections since 1996 (granted there was a gap in the middle) so the election is getting dubious.
And 72% of Palestinians believe the October 7th attack was “correct”.
Don’t treat people worse than literal cattle for decades and they won’t hate you.
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?
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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%.
“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?
How do you think polling works? If you had to “ask everyone” to have data, we wouldn’t have any…
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.
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.
Would you assume someone was referring to Hamas if they said “Fuck Palestine”?
Yes. Until I discover otherwise.
Citizens should be moved into the same category as their government. The exact same way liberals lump all Republicans together because they support trump. They believe the same Zionist bullshit that they are gods chosen people (echoes of Germany Master race ideology) and it’s their land. They elected Netanyahu because they support his ideology.
Removed by mod
Did i hurt your little feelers?
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.
You’re really suggesting that Netanyahu doesn’t want this war?
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.
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.
Bibi will be gone after the shooting stops. It’s happened before in Isreal. He currently has 15% approval FFS.
So he just has to keep the shooting going.
I’m sure he’s aware of this too.
That can last only so long. The money spent and Israel’s lack of productivity will stop it.
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.
Has this guy ever been wrong about anything?
Best President we never had.
Pity right? Right up there with what could’ve been had RBG stepped down a bit earlier.
I’ll never forgive her for clinging on to power. She destroyed her legacy and ruined lives for the greed of it
RBG wanted Hillary to pick her replacement. The hubris of that decision. SMH
I don’t think anyone expected Donnie Disgrace to get elected
Hopefully we’ve learned our lesson… But I wouldn’t bet on it.
I thought the same thing before the 2020 election. Was hopeful, but frankly only a crushing blowout would prove beyond any doubts that “we’ve learned”. It didn’t happen.
A lot of us did, actually.
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).
I doubt he gives a good fuck about AIPAC setting their sights on him, they’ve been sniping for years.
I can’t speak for him but my bet is that he’s experienced enough to wait for the dust to settle a little before forming an opinion.
Fair, whatever the reason is I am glad he is on the right side now
Dude was raised in a Jewish family and volunteered with his wife in Israel in college.
Mad props for ever speaking out about Israel, IMO.
I don’t think he’s alone. The Hamas attack was a shock to many people, and Israel of course would respond but… even six weeks ago it was starting to become obvious that this was a gross overreaction.
and what a long, awful six weeks it has been for humanity :(
I think he’s too smart to call it a genocide though
True israel needs to kill at least 20k innocent kids. Step it up Netanyahu these are rookie numbers
deleted by creator
He had to get with the scriptwriters
He’s against nuclear power, and that’s the only thing I’ve ever disagreed with him on.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
Awaiting the Christian Right to call him antisemitic.
Conservative Democrats will do it first.
When haven’t they done that?
Not the first time this happened.
The Christian right aren’t Sanders actual enemies; that would be the Democratic party.
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.
ok but, trump actually directly said he plans on being a dictator… it’s really the most important election in much of american history…
Just because Biden is the lesser evil (and he most certainly is. By far) doesn’t mean that he should be allowed to be an evil.
He’s supposed to represent the interests of every American who isn’t a fascist, not a foreign government that IS fascist.
Agreed. What does that change? I’m still voting for Biden.
There aren’t any perfect choices in life, all choices of consequence have downsides. Sometimes it’s choosing harm reduction. The man has a solid record of progress with climate legislation, pardoning marijuana possession charges, limiting insulin prices and more.
Could he do better? Hell yeah. But I’m an adult in a democracy and I understand that a vote is a tool, not a moral stance. I can apply that tool in the most effective way by voting for a lesser evil.
I also have other tools at my disposal, like money. So I give my money to groups like FairVote that supports Ranked Choice Voting so that, long after the 2024 election, we can vote for candidates instead of against them.
But I’m not boycotting the system we have unless someone can convince me that Trump will see a lack of voter turnout as a lack of mandate to implement his anti-Democratic, thuggish, racist, sexist plans.
deleted by creator
I agree with you 100% but boy howdy, you’re, bluntly, a terrible communicator this morning. Just dropping here arguing with your own demons. Neither you nor the other person are on the same topic. They’re only seeing up to the election.
You’re rightly looking further and calling for people to hold the fire under their Representatives so the shittery and evil can be burned out of them, specially as the fire is turned up as time goes on, not lowered.
That makes the world a better place, but no one hears your message when you call them spineless cynics for their ignorance (of your point, the only thing you have in evidence).
Seriously, read yours and their responses again. They’re looking at the base of the hill and arguing. You’re looking at the horizon and arguing something else. Maybe direct their gaze to the goal instead alongside the crushing of all their held opinions?
As one of the participants in the conversation, thanks for pointing that out. I see that I am being shortsighted and reading a meaning into the comments that may not be there. My vision shortsighted in an election year, a time to influence votes and non-votes, and this particular election year is a dire one.
So I cast my gaze as far as November, after which I either go back to the work of citizenry or the work of planning to flee the country.
I can’t deal with the world after January 20, 2025 until after the votes are counted. It’s easier for me to see further up the hill if I know the person I’m talking to isn’t encouraging people to sit out the election, because that is the source of my biggest anxiety right now.
What will my kids’ future be? I hope it will be egalitarian, where people are freed from the chains of capitalism to have their needs met and allow them to reach their full potential as humans. One where humans live sustainably in the natural and social environments. That won’t be on the ballot in November, but a vote for Trump would likely mean that future won’t happen in my kids’ lifetimes.
On the one hand, I see what you mean.
On the other, I didn’t at any point say anything that wasn’t true and it’s not my responsibility to patiently teach them how not to be a short-sighted sycophant. Even if I wanted to, that would almost certainly not be possible for me to do during the course of one written conversation
I’m rightfully fed up with condescending idiots pretending that a lack of principles equals great maturity and shaming them is the closest thing to achieving something constructive when dealing with avoved anti-idealist cynics like this one.
Entrenched anti-idealist tribalists can’t be reasoned with, but vehemently pointing out how idiotic their perspective is might jolt someone tempted to adopt a similar attitude awake.
I would ask you to step back and honestly consider if your words would be persuasive to an uninvolved observer
Sometimes choices aren’t fair and even the objectively best decision can have poor outcomes. Biden over Trump, there is no question. If we fight now and Trump or one of his lackeys gets into the chair it isn’t likely to end well. Nevermind wars elsewhere, we are hovering dangerously close to something dangerous here in the US. The best course of action is coming together to make sure every Republican possible is not elected, Biden or another non-GOP candidate is made POTUS, and from there carry the momentum into placing real pressure on the government while continuing to systematically knocking out local elections.
We tend to do this as a whole: Get distracted, time passes and we mostly forget about some crisis or another we were supposed to be all-in on, something vital slips past us, we realize it too late. Rinse repeat. What they count on is us arguing over the rights/wrongs as we always do, and for the loudest amongst us to drown out those trying to pull everyone else back in by doing things like, “THEY DON’T CARE ABOUT [insert major topic here]” and working to socially isolate.
Conflicts like in Ukraine and Gaza are horrendous. Yet we here in the US are at that point where either we step up and work to fix things here, or we risk a future where other countries report on atrocities committed inside our borders, by our government. Maybe a distant future and yet I can’t help but see that dim path ahead.
Sometimes choices aren’t fair and even the objectively best decision can have poor outcomes.
So basically every election ever.
And if future candidates make the same threat, will your analysis change?
Do you think it’s just a threat with Trump?
Well we have no reason to think they wouldn’t and this is a weird question so… What are you attempting to get at?
if they did and somehow were polling ok, i would also be rather afraid.
That doesn’t make it feel any better voting for genocide joe
It’s absolutely braindead to attribute this to Biden and it’s not reasonable to think anyone would actually believe that.
It’s not and it is. Biden has been going all out for Israeli support, even going so far as to bypass congress. Meanwhile Ukraine are still begging for US aid so they don’t get conquered by Russia.
Relations between the US and Israel are… Not new, to put it mildly.
I know that, but Biden is going above and beyond what’s “customary”, so to speak. There are past examples of US presidents taking action to stop Israeli atrocities, including Reagan (yes, Reagan). And no, Biden’s “please would you do your genocide a little more quietly” doesn’t count as action when he’s still overriding congress to fund them.
Thank you for this perspective.
bypass congress
Power of the purse.
There’s a difference between authorizing sales of weapons and authorizing gifts of weapons.
Fossil fuel industry too, since there’s a shitload of natural gas off the coast of Gaza.
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.
Bro the US used their veto in the UN to prevent the demand for a ceasefire passing. Literally only USA and Israel voted against. The US is the most powerful country in the world for now, you’d be hard pressed to find an arena of politics they DONT have immense power over. Certainly they have power over the genocides their allies do.
Palestine’s torpedoed all the previous attempts at peace, haven’t they? Can’t fault israel from considering this is just another attempt at a respite so more rockets and tunnels can be built and more foreign support can be gathered.
EDIT: I’ve taken a deeper look and found I don’t know enough about this to have an informed opinion.
what exactly are you talking about? Palestine ratified the Oslo accords even when Israel refused to, until the Camp David talks that literally demanded Palestine being a Soviet style Client state and Israel to control all water.
I mean Netanyahu literally supported Hamas to be able to ignore the PA push for a two-state solution because it interfered with the Theocratic ethnostate plan.
I’ve looked in deeper and found I wasn’t correct in assigning blame for the peacekeeping deal going under. Thanks for the reply.
Hmm, I feel like the US are why Israel can do as it pleases. If it weren’t for the US backup the chances of a new war on Israel by several of it’s neighbors backed by Iran would be very plausible. I don’t wish for this to happen, it would be horrible, and I understand that the US should perhaps back Israel to a certain degree. But in return they can ask a lot from Israel, and if Israel doesn’t even comply with not committing terrible war crimes, then the US could threaten them with not having their backs anymore.
What I’m trying to say is: I think you underestimate the role the US can play.
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 wield power 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.
Why would it be horrible for Iran to go to war with Israel? It wasn’t horrible when Russia, UK and USA went to war with Germany. Same situation.
If Iran won a war against Israel at least some of the more extreme in Iran want extermination. You could potentially be trading an incredibly one-sided war with a possible second Holocaust. Many of the most extreme political factions in surrounding countries want Israel wiped off the map and replaced with a Muslim theocracy. If you destabilize the area you’re risking worse than is currently happening.
I don’t think that means the USA should be giving Israel a blank check, but I’m also not a foreign policy expert and I suspect the diplomatic situation is far more complex than you and I can comprehend sitting comfortably on our couch. Especially since holding Israel accountable is also not as popular domestically as it seems in online communities like this one. So any diplomatic pressure has to be behind closed doors.
Israel is already doing a genocide. I’d rather the genociders get hurt than innocents. Though there is zero reason to think Iran would actually genocide anyone. Like, that whole idea is very much a bridge we will cross when we come to it.
Words matter, war and genocide are 2 different things. I know it’s in vogue to call it genocide right now, but killing 0.4% of a population is not remotely genocide. It’s certainly a one sided retaliatory war that is grotesque and shouldn’t be happening. But if Isreal fails there is a chance millions of Jews die, again, we’re talking 22,000 vs millions. I suspect that is the impossible situation foreign policy analysts have to weigh when deciding what to do next.
They are very different, and if this was just a war I wouldn’t care. Israel is the aggressor in this, the idea that this has to do with the defense of Israel is a vicious lie intended to justify genocide. Theoretical people do not matter compared to real people. The foreign policy decision for anybody that isnt genocidalis trivially easy: stop doing a genocide.
Let’s say an extremist faction of Mexico, that had power and was integrated into the government came north and captured 240 people and killed another 1200. How do you think the US would respond? Would many in this country or other countries call our inevitable outsized retaliation genocide? If you don’t say no you’re a liar. One has to recognize the geopolitical lense people view Israel from and the desperate need for some to propagandize Israel as genocidal. That doesn’t make it true, and neither does desperately repeating it as often as possible. If anything it weakens your argument because it makes you seem like a clown to any serious person.
The Likud in Israel needs Hamas as much as Hamas needs the Likud. They both derive all of their power from a protracted conflict. There is no incentive to culturally and ethnically destroy the Palestinian people, because the day that happens is the day the Likud cease to exist. Netanyahu has shown over his political career that opportunism and power are his only driving forces, not cultural homogeneity and genocide. If you’re going to make an argument that it’s genocide you need to back it with coherent thought beyond, “but innocent people are dying”. If that’s your metric then all wars are genocide and the word looses all meaning.
What Israel is doing is awful, but it’s not genocide.
My fear is that the people fighting against Israel are too brown for America to support.
Most of America supports Palestine. You only think that because the media loves to use it as a scapegoat. And regardless, who said anything about America? All we have to do is sit down and shut up. Iran can easily handle the Israel situation itself. If America joined in it would be purely for capitalist’s opportunism.
providing military support is influencing the situation politically
Stop funding terrorists, stop funding evil regimes, it’s not so hard
Fucking Anti-Semite!
Edit: /s
Nothing more antisemitic than a jew calling for an end to a genocide
Yep, that was the joke.
Clear sarcasm getting blasted. C’mon lemmy.
I’ve never seen a post where the /s seemed less necessary. You’re better than this Lemmy.
Wanna know the dirty little secret about lemmy that we’ve all slowly had to realize about reddit too? We’re not better than this.
Learning it the hard way
Bruh, it’s pretty much Reddit up in here. Sadly.
There really is no such thing as clear sarcasm in this political climate.
If they were actually a zionist, there would he a wall of text explaining that actually Israel is showing a lot of restraint and they have a right to “self defense.” Generally the over the top tone indicates sarcasm. Worst case, check their profile and see if they’re actually insane.
Clear sarcasm getting blasted.
Poe’s law says otherwise. Plenty of goof-balls here that would make such a claim boldfaced.
I’ll send flowers to their next of kin
Forgot to put /s and paid the price (；一_一)
I’m not sure if it’s recency bias or if Lemmy manages to be even worse about obvious sarcasm detection than the snoo site.
And to think the DNC wanted to attack him for being Jewish.
Removed by mod
Please don’t attack stupidity with ableism.
The original commenter was likely using sarcasm
Clearly sarcasm, it’s a quote from The Big Lebowski
That’s really not my issue.
I agree ableism is bad but the original comment wasn’t stupidity, it was decent sarcasm.
The original comment wasn’t bigoted. The r-word is bigotry. “The original comment is stupid” wouldn’t excuse the N-word, would it? What’s the difference?
If a comment is stupid, call it stupid. Don’t be a bigot.
Since when did I excuse the r-word usage? I just said that ableism is bad. I condemn it. I object only to you calling the original comment dumb when it was satirical.
Pretty sure they’re joking based on their comment history
One thing I don’t miss about Reddit. A top level joke post on every discussion.
You’re the one who can’t detect sarcasm
Better late than never I guess
deleted by creator
Oh, so NOW he decides he has a stance on this. Okay.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
I don’t understand why you guys don’t revolt.
Because that takes work and we don’t have the backbone for it.
Fuck the dnc
Right, so effectively never.
Then why is he a member of a party that does exactly that?
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.
Um, what party do you think Bernie is a member of? He is pretty famously an independent…
Lord knows, we heard it enough from clinton supporters during 2016 as justification for the party’s partiality towards her.
He’s not a Democrat
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
He has been calling for deescalation since October 8th, weirdo.
Christ. Nobody is ever good enough for some of these people, not even Bernie.
And never directly called for a ceasefire, but for ‘humanitarian pause’ just like Biden called for so he could rearm Zionists.
Bruh.
Removed by mod
Genuinely lol’d :)
Old pander bear must have finally saw a revolt when the dum dum left started abandoning him.
