Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Esran posted:

I'm talking about how we're discussing whether it's reasonable to believe that Biden was being genuine when he said he expected a deal to be imminent. I've laid out why I believe it is not reasonable. I'd like you to provide evidence for your position that he was, instead of asking "Why would Biden care about a primary that he was already going to win".

No, I don't view Biden's claim as independent. Your claim is that Biden had reason to believe a deal was imminent. Both sides said that a deal was not imminent immediately after Biden's comments, the negotiations ultimately failed, and the two sides are still not remotely close to agreeing, and seemingly never have been (given the information we have access to). "There are negotiations happening" isn't a good reason for Biden to say that a deal is right around the corner, when the two sides still firmly disagree on fundamental poo poo like "Can Israel still invade Rafah during the ceasefire" (which: lol) or "Is the ceasefire permanent" or "Will Israel withdraw from Gaza".

I'll admit that my phrasing was clumsy. What I should have said was "I guess you can just make up some secret deal that was close to done but ended up falling through".

The assumption I think you have of Biden is what you've implied in this thread: That he wasn't lying about believing this deal was around the corner. What evidence do you have supporting that belief?

I'm saying they have been holding these positions for months, as these are exactly the demands both sides have been making in past negotiations as well. I'm not saying they have been sitting in Cairo doing this exact set of negotiation meetings for months.

I don’t believe Biden was lying because he would have literally nothing to gain from it. We already know he was telling the truth about Hamas and Israel approaching the negotiating table.

So why would he pretend like a deal is near if he didn’t think it was? About the only reason is if he lied all of the time just out of habit, like Trump does. Which, IMO, he doesn’t

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Slashrat
Jun 6, 2011

YOSPOS

Kalit posted:

So why would he pretend like a deal is near if he didn’t think it was? About the only reason is if he lied all of the time just out of habit, like Trump does. Which, IMO, he doesn’t

An alternative reason for saying it that I could find plausible would be that he thought saying it would pressure each party to get the deal done faster because of greater expectations from their respective backyards that one was close. Obviously it didn't work out that way, but if he figured that the alternative was nothing happening anyway and the only thing it stood to cost him was a little embarrassment for being premature, then it might have seemed worth the shot.

Jethro
Jun 1, 2000

I was raised on the dairy, Bitch!

Kalit posted:

Why would Biden care about a primary that he was already going to win? If it was right before the general election, you'd have a point about the timing.
You are correct that "winning" was probably not a huge concern when it came to the Michigan primary, but this season narrative is certainly important. I don't know if he was "lying" or not, but I assume he'd prefer not to have an embarrassingly large number of uncommitted voters, and making it look like he cares about ending the violence in Gaza (without losing votes on the other end by going to strongly against Israel) could help there.

Barrel Cactaur
Oct 6, 2021

Biden whispering was a barely on topic issue when it was current events a month ago, relitigating it now just looks like an attempt to dodge the attention it would get in USPOL or the electoralism thread, where the behavior and beliefs of Biden are permanently on topic.

Esran
Apr 28, 2008

Kalit posted:

I don’t believe Biden was lying because he would have literally nothing to gain from it.

He has plenty to gain.

Lying gives him something to point to when people make noise about how he's doing jack poo poo to stop the genocide. It also serves as PR in general, oh look, he tried so hard to make peace, but it just didn't work out. While there is no chance of him losing a primary outright, it still looks bad to barely scrape by, so there's that too.

If Biden were doing nothing, liberals would have a hard time defending him. By appearing to be doing something, while handing Israel a mountain of weaponry, diplomatic cover, and carte blanche to do what they want with the tools Biden is giving them, he gets to support the genocide in material terms, while being able to deny (plausibly to some, apparently) that he's fully in the tank for Israel. This is also why we're getting a plan to make a port in Gaza, instead of Biden simply ordering Netanyahu to open the Rafah Crossing: It provides something to point to that makes it seem like Biden gives a poo poo, while not actually changing anything in real terms.

Administration officials are even saying as much:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/biden-disparages-netanyahu-private-hasnt-changed-us-policy-israel-rcna138282 posted:

Yet, even as Biden has escalated his rhetoric, he is not yet prepared to make significant policy changes, officials said. He and his aides continue to believe his approach of unequivocally supporting Israel is the right one.

Policy changes are the only things that matter. Biden's furrowed brow when talking to the press about Netanyahu changes nothing.

Kalit posted:

We already know he was telling the truth about Hamas and Israel approaching the negotiating table.

That's not what we're talking about. He said a deal was imminent. If Biden had said "Israel and Hamas are negotiating", everyone would have been like "no poo poo, they've been doing that off and on for months".

Kalit posted:

So why would he pretend like a deal is near if he didn’t think it was?

For any of the reasons an American president might care about domestic reputation, including the ones I outlined.

Kalit posted:

About the only reason is if he lied all of the time just out of habit, like Trump does. Which, IMO, he doesn’t

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier. You're just arbitrarily assuming that Biden is an honest guy.

Esran fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Mar 8, 2024

The Sean
Apr 17, 2005

Am I handsome now?


Kalit posted:

I don’t believe Biden was lying because he would have literally nothing to gain from it.

I appreciate the honesty of you stating you believe things without evidence and that is good enough for you (but others have to provide evidence for you to change your mind which you end up ignoring anyways). I'm not sure what the purpose of you discussing here is if you decide a position and use imagination to back it up.

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Esran posted:

He has plenty to gain.

Lying gives him something to point to when people make noise about how he's doing jack poo poo to stop the genocide. It also serves as PR in general, oh look, he tried so hard to make peace, but it just didn't work out. While there is no chance of him losing a primary outright, it still looks bad to barely scrape by, so there's that too.
PR in general? If he states something that he knows isn't true, anyone who pays enough attention to him saying it will know that it ended up being wrong. To me, it seems like being wrong about it would negatively affect his PR.

If he wanted people to know he was trying something for PR points, he would have just stated "I got Hamas back to the negotiating table" and left it at that. That way, he wouldn't be wrong and it would show that he was still doing something.

quote:

If Biden were doing nothing, liberals would have a hard time defending him. By appearing to be doing something, while handing Israel a mountain of weaponry, diplomatic cover, and carte blanche to do what they want with the tools Biden is giving them, he gets to support the genocide in material terms, while being able to deny (plausibly to some, apparently) that he's fully in the tank for Israel. This is also why we're getting a plan to make a port in Gaza, instead of Biden simply ordering Netanyahu to open the Rafah Crossing: It provides something to point to that makes it seem like Biden gives a poo poo, while not actually changing anything in real terms.

Administration officials are even saying as much:

Policy changes are the only things that matter. Biden's furrowed brow when talking to the press about Netanyahu changes nothing.
No idea what you're getting at with this point.

quote:

That's not what we're talking about. He said a deal was imminent. If Biden had said "Israel and Hamas are negotiating", everyone would have been like "no poo poo, they've been doing that off and on for months".
He did not say a deal was imminent. He said he hoped that an agreement would occur by that weekend and that he was told by Sullivan that a ceasefire deal was close.

quote:

For any of the reasons an American president might care about domestic reputation, including the ones I outlined.
His reputation wouldn't be improved, only damaged because he was wrong. Which, if he was lying, seems like a stupid thing to do.

quote:

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier. You're just arbitrarily assuming that Biden is an honest guy.
Stop making assumptions. I believe Biden would lie if there's enough benefit from it. Which this is far from.

The Sean posted:

I appreciate the honesty of you stating you believe things without evidence and that is good enough for you (but others have to provide evidence for you to change your mind which you end up ignoring anyways). I'm not sure what the purpose of you discussing here is if you decide a position and use imagination to back it up.

I'm providing literally as much concrete evidence as Esran is with regards to if Biden is lying or not, so I'm not sure what your point is. None of us are mind readers.

Kalit fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Mar 8, 2024

The Sean
Apr 17, 2005

Am I handsome now?


Kalit posted:

None of us are mind readers.

I understand that but--

Kalit posted:

If he wanted people to know he was trying something for PR points, he would have just stated "I got Hamas back to the negotiating table" and left it at that. That way, he wouldn't be wrong and it would show that he was still doing something.

--oh, uh, well, I guess some of us are.

The Sean fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Mar 8, 2024

Dreylad
Jun 19, 2001

Fidelitious posted:

What are people's thoughts on this?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/injunction-montreal-protest-real-estate-1.7135106

It seems there was a protest at the synagogue because there was a real estate event there allegedly promoting property in the West Bank. Then there was a follow-up protest at CJA, presumably because of them being Zionist and having connections to Hillel.
No idea why those other places are included in the injunction.

Usual backlash that protesting near a synagogue is awful, despite the fact that they weren't protesting it for religious reasons.
I dunno, there's no proper way to protest I guess.

I was at the original protest in Thornhill. It was definitely jarring to be outside a synagogue protesting but they're selling West Bank land. It's loving awful and should be illegal. There were several rabbis and at least one other Jewish organization out with us, which, as silly as it sounds, made me feel better about it.

rscott
Dec 10, 2009
https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/politics/floating-pier-troops-aid-gaza/index.html

An update on the whole emergency aid port in Gaza, seems to throw some cold water on all the should we say, irrational exuberance, demonstrated yesterday.

The Pentagon is reporting that it's going to take at least a month and possibly two to create the temporary port, they still don't know who's actually going to distribute the aid once it's offloaded, and they're stressing that the overland crossings are actually the most effective way to distribute aid, all of which seems to directly contradict what a lot of posters both in this thread and in the USCE thread were stating.

Esran
Apr 28, 2008
https://twitter.com/kann_news/status/1766198667147419825

I hope this is some kind of AI video and not real, otherwise it's beyond parody.

Biden wants Israel to provide security for the port that's being built because Israel won't let aid through the border crossings.

This is getting to "and Mexico's gonna pay for it" levels of dumb.

Esran fucked around with this message at 22:56 on Mar 8, 2024

theCalamity
Oct 23, 2010

Cry Havoc and let slip the Hogs of War
So the port can take up to two months to implement and the Israelis are going to provide security for it even though they're the ones preventing aid from getting through on land

This is a farcical and evil president.

Vahakyla
May 3, 2013

Esran posted:

https://twitter.com/kann_news/status/1766198667147419825

I hope this is some kind of AI video and not real, otherwise it's beyond parody.

Biden wants Israel to provide security for the port that's being built because Israel won't let aid through the border crossings.

This is getting to "and Mexico's gonna pay for it" levels of dumb.

That reads as "they better ensure it won't get bombed". Not as Israeli troops being on American ships or anything.
The main threat to off-shore assets is Israel, no one else.

Nebalebadingdong
Jun 30, 2005

i made a video game.
why not give it a try!?
this is such a bizarre combination of cruelty, stupidity and embarrassment

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Esran posted:

https://twitter.com/kann_news/status/1766198667147419825

I hope this is some kind of AI video and not real, otherwise it's beyond parody.

Biden wants Israel to provide security for the port that's being built because Israel won't let aid through the border crossings.

This is getting to "and Mexico's gonna pay for it" levels of dumb.

Haha, I actually predicted something like this in the VFW thread. Build a new ingress point and hand it to the attackers.

Vahakyla
May 3, 2013

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

Haha, I actually predicted something like this in the VFW thread. Build a new ingress point and hand it to the attackers.

What ingress points does Israel need the US to build? The country has air dominance over the Levant, can drive willy nilly anywhere in Gaza with its Army, and do whatever gently caress it pleases. The troops are already in Gaza. Are they gonna board ships so they can get back into Gaza?


Reported Israeli troop movements last updated today at Financial Times.
The limits of advance are not prevented by any kind of conventional military force creating a front line or anything, but rather the Israeli Army doing whatever the gently caress it does (crimes) and advancing slowly. Where do you intend in your scenario that they're gonna sail to? Cyprus?

https://www.ft.com/content/42bbe534-8a0d-4ba8-9cc6-f84936d87196

Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Mar 8, 2024

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
They are building a landing and giving it to the attackers. The President of the United states just said so.

rscott
Dec 10, 2009

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

They are building a landing and giving it to the attackers. The President of the United states just said so.

I don't really think that's the most reasonable way to interpret what Biden said, the United States isn't putting any infrastructure on the ground

shimmy shimmy
Nov 13, 2020

rscott posted:

I don't really think that's the most reasonable way to interpret what Biden said, the United States isn't putting any infrastructure on the ground

If you build a piece of infrastructure that's just right next to the ground and, in fact, connects to it via a bridge that you also build, saying it's not putting any infrastructure 'on the ground' seems like splitting hairs to me?

Goatse James Bond
Mar 28, 2010

If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead
I generally try to restrain myself from making confident predictions here (which admittedly cedes the field to less cautious posting), but I'm also pretty hesitant to take "Biden drops a line [that I haven't listened to yet]" as a detailed and precisely worded assessment. The sources in this cnn article are specifically not talking about giving Israel security control of the land end of the pier:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/politics/floating-pier-troops-aid-gaza/index.html

but rather are along the lines of "I dunno, other regional allies or something"

Kagrenak
Sep 8, 2010

rscott posted:

I don't really think that's the most reasonable way to interpret what Biden said, the United States isn't putting any infrastructure on the ground

Also similarly to the weird post last page about the US "helping Israel with infrastructure to develop the oil [sic] fields off the coast of Gaza," they don't need a temporary floating pier to achieve the same aims. Israel already was illegally developing the natural gas fields and they issued permits for that in July 2023 and they already move around the less dense areas of the strip with impunity. There's no front that they need a beachhead behind or anything like that.

There's plenty to criticize with this plan without making up things. The worst (and imo unfortunately one of the most likely) reading of Biden's statement is that Israel will still be allowed to inspect the trucks coming in which I sure hope is not the case.

Google Jeb Bush posted:

I generally try to restrain myself from making confident predictions here (which admittedly cedes the field to less cautious posting), but I'm also pretty hesitant to take "Biden drops a line [that I haven't listened to yet]" as a detailed and precisely worded assessment. The sources in this cnn article are specifically not talking about giving Israel security control of the land end of the pier:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/08/politics/floating-pier-troops-aid-gaza/index.html

but rather are along the lines of "I dunno, other regional allies or something"

Very much hoping this is the more accurate picture.

rscott
Dec 10, 2009

shimmy shimmy posted:

If you build a piece of infrastructure that's just right next to the ground and, in fact, connects to it via a bridge that you also build, saying it's not putting any infrastructure 'on the ground' seems like splitting hairs to me?

Because a pier and/or a causeway isn't a military base?

Kagrenak posted:

Also similarly to the weird post last page about the US "helping Israel with infrastructure to develop the oil [sic] fields off the coast of Gaza," they don't need a temporary floating pier to achieve the same aims. Israel already was illegally developing the natural gas fields and they issued permits for that in July 2023 and they already move around the less dense areas of the strip with impunity. There's no front that they need a beachhead behind or anything like that.

There's plenty to criticize with this plan without making up things. The worst (and imo unfortunately one of the most likely) reading of Biden's statement is that Israel will still be allowed to inspect the trucks coming in which I sure hope is not the case.

Very much hoping this is the more accurate picture.

Israeli officials are going to conduct inspections in Cyprus per this Guardian article, which is another way they can throw a wrench into the gears. I don't think anyone knows who is going to be responsible for it once it's on shore.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/07/gaza-floating-port-aid-palestinians-impact

Goatse James Bond
Mar 28, 2010

If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead
Yeah I saw something vague about inspections, thanks for the Guardian article. One of Israel's favorite aid truck moves when the total psychos aren't driving the bus on that particular day is to insist on thorough inspections and then slow walk em and oh oops guess throughput is down 80%, what a shame.

Jaxyon
Mar 7, 2016
I’m just saying I would like to see a man beat a woman in a cage. Just to be sure.

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

They are building a landing and giving it to the attackers. The President of the United states just said so.

Finally the IDF will be able to get into Gaza. Biden has removed the last obstacle.

Love Rat
Jan 15, 2008

I've made a psycho call to the woman I love, I've kicked a dog to death, and now I'm going to pepper spray an acquaintance. Something... I mean, what's happened to me?
By time this port gets built, we'll be well into mass starvation killing scores of people. The food situation is already reaching critical. Unless they're gonna drop a magical port module from orbit, thousands will already be dead.

The only solution is tying continued aid and support for Israel to their letting trucks through, like yesterday.

Esran
Apr 28, 2008

Love Rat posted:

Unless they're gonna drop a magical port module from orbit, thousands will already be dead.

Elon's ears just perked up.

Love Rat posted:

The only solution is tying continued aid and support for Israel to their letting trucks through, like yesterday.

Absolutely, and it's a thing Biden could do with a single phone call. All this other bullshit is a smokescreen. I guess if you just lie big, it'll get people discussing the minutiae.

hooman
Oct 11, 2007

This guy seems legit.
Fun Shoe

Kalit posted:

Stop making assumptions. I believe Biden would lie if there's enough benefit from it. Which this is far from.

From what evidence have you drawn this conclusion?

Because there is a track record of Biden saying things that are untrue for no apparent gain.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/31/biden-loves-retell-certain-stories-some-arent-credible/

Goatse James Bond
Mar 28, 2010

If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

Love Rat posted:

By time this port gets built, we'll be well into mass starvation killing scores of people. The food situation is already reaching critical. Unless they're gonna drop a magical port module from orbit, thousands will already be dead.

The only solution is tying continued aid and support for Israel to their letting trucks through, like yesterday.

Well yeah, the answer is "do both". Also, as I posted before, UN estimates from late January suggest that thousands are already dead from malnutrition related issues (probably exacerbated by dirty water issues), we certainly don't want it to get worse.

I happen to think the correlation between the timing of US complaints about aid and Israel temporarily being less lovely about food / water / medicine isn't a total coincidence, but lots more needs to get through.

Thorn Wishes Talon
Oct 18, 2014

by Fluffdaddy

Esran posted:

He has plenty to gain.

Lying gives him something to point to when people make noise about how he's doing jack poo poo to stop the genocide. It also serves as PR in general, oh look, he tried so hard to make peace, but it just didn't work out. While there is no chance of him losing a primary outright, it still looks bad to barely scrape by, so there's that too.

I would argue that in this case the PR was very bad, though: it showed America and in fact the entire world that he's a decrepit freak who has no idea what is going on, much less have any control over any of it. It turned out that millions of people's impression of Biden as an old and weak leader was in fact correct.

teen witch
Oct 9, 2012

hooman posted:

From what evidence have you drawn this conclusion?

Because there is a track record of Biden saying things that are untrue for no apparent gain.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/31/biden-loves-retell-certain-stories-some-arent-credible/

I’m starting to think Biden doesn’t or can’t really comprehend what is going on and is winging it to cover that up. Like the mental faculties are straight up not there to grasp the enormity of what’s going on, and to him it’s just another Bad Time in the Middle East, so stay the course.

Would any other president handle it better? Unlikely! But I do think Biden’s actions and inactions are uniquely lovely, likely due to it not loving clicking that there is a genocide and we have so much blood on our hands. Among all the bonkers decisions this administration has made, actively fueling a genocide will be the stand out gently caress up, and rightfully so.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

teen witch posted:

I’m starting to think Biden doesn’t or can’t really comprehend what is going on and is winging it to cover that up. Like the mental faculties are straight up not there to grasp the enormity of what’s going on, and to him it’s just another Bad Time in the Middle East, so stay the course.

Would any other president handle it better? Unlikely! But I do think Biden’s actions and inactions are uniquely lovely, likely due to it not loving clicking that there is a genocide and we have so much blood on our hands. Among all the bonkers decisions this administration has made, actively fueling a genocide will be the stand out gently caress up, and rightfully so.

There is no evidence to support this at all, also if you think his actions in regards to Israel are uniquely lovely you haven't been paying attention to what past presidents have done.

hadji murad
Apr 18, 2006

socialsecurity posted:

There is no evidence to support this at all, also if you think his actions in regards to Israel are uniquely lovely you haven't been paying attention to what past presidents have done.

This is a supremely horrible situation that many presidents didn't have to face and to see him get a pass like this is pretty gross.

B B
Dec 1, 2005

socialsecurity posted:

There is no evidence to support this at all, also if you think his actions in regards to Israel are uniquely lovely you haven't been paying attention to what past presidents have done.

Joe Biden is uniquely lovely when compared to other Democrats in regards to Israel. In fact, he actively undermined Obama and Clinton's efforts at peace talks during the previous Democratic administration and described himself as Bib's "best loving friend":

How Joe Biden Became America's Top Israel Hawk posted:

After Biden became vice president in 2009, he stuck with his “no daylight” stance. In a memoir published last year, Netanyahu wrote that Biden made his willingness to help clear during an early meeting in Washington. “You don’t have too many friends here, buddy,” Biden reportedly said. “I’m the one friend you do have. So call me when you need to.”

His commitment to insulating Israel from public pressure caused him to undermine President Barack Obama at a key moment when the administration was trying to revive peace talks. The best account of this comes from Peter Beinart, who is currently the editor-at-large at Jewish Currents. In a 2020 article based on interviews with 15 former administration officials, Beinart concluded that “during a critical period early in the Obama administration, when the White House contemplated exerting real pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu to keep the possibility of a Palestinian state alive, Biden did more than any other cabinet-level official to shield Netanyahu from that pressure.”

In 2010, Netanyahu’s government infuriated Obama and his advisers by announcing a major settlement expansion while Biden was in Israel. As Beinart reported, Biden and his team wanted to handle the dispute privately. Obama’s camp took a different route by drawing up a list of demands to be made of Netanyahu. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton then gave the prime minister 24 hours to respond, warning him, “If you will not be able to comply, it might have unprecedented consequences on the bilateral relations of the kind never seen before.”

Biden was soon in touch with a stunned Netanayhu. A former administration official who saw the transcript of their call told Beinart that “Biden completely undercut the secretary of state and gave [Netanyahu] a strong indication that whatever was being planned in Washington was hotheadedness and he could defuse it when he got back.” When Clinton saw the transcript, she “realized she’d been thrown under the bus” by Biden, the official added.

When the prime minister and his staff visited the White House soon after, one of Netanyahu’s top advisers told the New York Times Magazine that Biden reminded him, “Just remember that I am your best loving friend here.” Thanks in part to the support from Biden, Netanyahu learned not to be concerned by Obama’s effort to push for Palestinian statehood. “He entered the lion’s den and came out in one piece,” a senior US official told Israeli journalist Ben Caspit. “He began to understand that Obama’s bark is much worse than his bite, that there is no reason to fear him.”

A former Obama administration official I spoke with could not recall any situation in which Biden was not the most sympathetic person to Israel in the room. The official added that Biden showed little curiosity about Palestine—in contrast to Obama, who was eager to meet with Palestinians and get their perspective while in the region.

For the rest of Obama’s presidency, Biden would remain the man who had assured Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren in the early days of the administration that “Israel could get into a fistfight with this country and we’d still defend you.”
During Obama’s final days in office, a United Nations resolution came up that demanded a halt to Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank and other occupied territory. On a call to discuss how the United States should vote at the UN, multiple administration officials told Beinart, only Biden and then–Treasury Secretary Jack Lew supported vetoing the resolution. Unusually, Biden and Lew failed in that effort. Lew is now Biden’s ambassador to Israel.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/12/how-joe-biden-became-americas-top-israel-hawk/

The material support he's provided to Israel since October 7--and by this, I mean the 100+ secret transfers of weapons and ammunition--has lead to an unprecedented number of Palestinian deaths. I think "uniquely lovely" is a pretty apt description of him.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

hadji murad posted:

This is a supremely horrible situation that many presidents didn't have to face and to see him get a pass like this is pretty gross.

Pretty sure this is giving a pass to all previous presidents. What unique things has Biden done here that other presidents didn't or wouldn't? Do you think we starting giving military aid to Israel on day 1 of Biden's presidency?

B B posted:

Joe Biden is uniquely lovely when compared to other Democrats in regards to Israel. In fact, he actively undermined Obama and Clinton's efforts at peace talks during the previous Democratic administration:

The material support he's provided to Israel since October 7--and by this, I mean the 100+ secret transfers of weapons and ammunition--has lead to an unprecedented number of Palestinian deaths. I think "uniquely lovely" is a pretty apt description of him.

The 100 secret transfers that we all know about? We've given aid to Israel during all their previous attacks on Gaza too, arms sales are not a new or unique thing. All American presidents have been lovely about Israel pretending this is a new thing is just giving the US a pass on previous atrocities.

socialsecurity fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Mar 10, 2024

E2M2
Mar 2, 2007

Ain't No Thang.
I mean at this point the hospital system has collapsed. People are starving to death in Gaza. Pretty much no residental builds are standing, and all of Gaza are refugees now. When in the past has a US president overseen anything even close to this? Maybe I guess the founding of Israel itself but its been 70 years right?

Neurolimal
Nov 3, 2012
Biden's a genuine Zionist to a degree that I don't think many presidents have been in the past.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/biden-a-longtime-friend-israel-critic-of-settlements-may-be-at-odds-over-iran/

quote:

Less known is a meeting with her successor Menachem Begin a few years later, which The New York Times at the time described as a “highly emotional confrontation.”
In June 1982, a few days after the start of the Lebanon War, known as Operation Peace for the Galilee, Begin met with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington. Several lawmakers grilled him over Israel’s alleged disproportionate use of force.
“A young senator rose and delivered a very impassioned speech — I must say that it’s been a while since I’ve heard such a talented speaker — and he actually supported Operation Peace for the Galilee,” Begin told Israeli reporters after he returned to Jerusalem.
The senator — Biden — said he would go even further than Israel, adding that he’d forcefully fend off anyone who sought to invade his country, even if that meant killing women or children.
“I disassociated myself from these remarks,” Begin said. “I said to him: No, sir; attention must be paid. According to our values, it is forbidden to hurt women and children, even in war… Sometimes there are casualties among the civilian population as well. But it is forbidden to aspire to this. This is a yardstick of human civilization, not to hurt civilians.”

I haven't seen much to suggest he's changed his tune since this meeting, on the contrary, in fact. Both George Bush and Ronald Reagan strongarmed Israel to stop attacks that caused far fewer casualties than this latest adventure.

He's been critical of some Israeli actions, but only insofar as it jeopardizes Israel's existence & its existence as a Jewish state.

Goatse James Bond
Mar 28, 2010

If you see me posting please remind me that I have Charlie Work in the reports forum to do instead

E2M2 posted:

I mean at this point the hospital system has collapsed. People are starving to death in Gaza. Pretty much no residental builds are standing, and all of Gaza are refugees now. When in the past has a US president overseen anything even close to this? Maybe I guess the founding of Israel itself but its been 70 years right?

Seeing different estimates but as of sometime in January it looks like 30-40% of residences were still standing. More than 60% are displaced (hard to get perfect numbers) because returning to your intact or intact-ish home while Israel is still attacking is a dicey proposition. That's not stopping some people though, which is part of why we're getting lots of stories of "this family returned to their home in North Gaza and are now living on the razors edge even when Israel isn't actually shooting at them".

teen witch
Oct 9, 2012

hadji murad posted:

This is a supremely horrible situation that many presidents didn't have to face and to see him get a pass like this is pretty gross.
Probably a better way of saying it than I did, I’m just shocked with how he’s handling the situation. Like other presidents would have handled this poorly, but not to this degree. Salt in the wound that he’s got a blank check to let this happen, literally or figuratively.

I also don’t think he understands how horrible this situation is. Why? Likely for a multitude of reasons. I think one of the reasons that’s overlooked is that his brain doesn’t connect “genocide bad” and “you are participating in a genocide”, as if it were an indecipherable language, despite people telling him plain as loving day what’s going on.

I keep wondering how this moment in time will look a decade from now. In my heart of hearts I hope it’s plain as day and undeniable that this is a genocide, that only kooks and bigots are denialists. I hope there are Nuremberg trials and truth and reconciliations to state undoubtedly who did this, why it happened, and the horrors that occurred. But even then I’m having my doubts that people will accept it, and that we will still be in this living hell of people cheering this genocide on.

This whole event has been a serious mask-off moment for me and it’s hard to handle, mentally (apologies for my word vomit). Though I’m surprised in a lot of people I’d never expect, who are actively calling out that this is supremely hosed up.

hadji murad
Apr 18, 2006

socialsecurity posted:

Pretty sure this is giving a pass to all previous presidents. What unique things has Biden done here that other presidents didn't or wouldn't? Do you think we starting giving military aid to Israel on day 1 of Biden's presidency?

He's facilitating the murder of tens of thousands of women and children which other recent presidents haven't done to the Palestinians. The numbers of dead make his unique ghoulishness readily apparent.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Jethro
Jun 1, 2000

I was raised on the dairy, Bitch!

teen witch posted:

Probably a better way of saying it than I did, I’m just shocked with how he’s handling the situation. Like other presidents would have handled this poorly, but not to this degree. Salt in the wound that he’s got a blank check to let this happen, literally or figuratively.
Given the things that TFG is saying right now about how much he would send troops to help with performing genocide, I think you are still not getting how bad every president would be in this situation.

quote:


I also don’t think he understands how horrible this situation is. Why? Likely for a multitude of reasons. I think one of the reasons that’s overlooked is that his brain doesn’t connect “genocide bad” and “you are participating in a genocide”, as if it were an indecipherable language, despite people telling him plain as loving day what’s going on.

I keep wondering how this moment in time will look a decade from now. In my heart of hearts I hope it’s plain as day and undeniable that this is a genocide, that only kooks and bigots are denialists. I hope there are Nuremberg trials and truth and reconciliations to state undoubtedly who did this, why it happened, and the horrors that occurred. But even then I’m having my doubts that people will accept it, and that we will still be in this living hell of people cheering this genocide on.

This whole event has been a serious mask-off moment for me and it’s hard to handle, mentally (apologies for my word vomit). Though I’m surprised in a lot of people I’d never expect, who are actively calling out that this is supremely hosed up.
Other than that, agreed. This is horrible.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply