Disagreements over Zionist war crimes are tearing the entire world apart.

seems reasonable.

I wonder what the israelis claimed her “crime” was. ‘Aiding hamas’, I imagine.

This is a defensive system, of course it is useful during war time but it is still a defensive system.

And there you go again, funding zionism.

While pretending Omar and the entire DSA misunderstood what this was about, but you do.

the MOU is about a yearly aid package, that MTG (who I hate) wanted to add an amendment to cut.

Thats a no brainer choice. Unless AOC or someone can show me a poison pill in that ammendment, its straightforward and simple to pick the only ethical and progressive vote.
And AOC failed to pick it for some reason. It wasnt complicated.

Omar made the right choice and called out AOC for failing to. And rightly so. DSA called AOC out as well. This is simple math. Lets do the simple math and stop pretending its calculus.

Do we all want to be funding weapons for Israel or do we not? That was the choice.

Are you claiming Omar and the DSA are just… wrong? to call out AOC? https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/aoc-israel-ilhan-omar-iron-dome-rcna220394

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/11/us/politics/aoc-dsa-endorsement.html

Her distinction between offensive and defensive weapons is meaningless.

1. its morally and ethically wrong to aid Israel in light of their actions.
2. The US has no obligation to send them any weapons, regardless of the use case. Her trying to parse out defensive vs offensive is a manipulation and a shallow sales job.
3. US gov employees are explicitly forbidden by US law from lending any aid whatsoever to any country committed war crimes.
4. The cost of supporting Israel is the unravelling of the entire western world order. Its not just the US. And for what, some pitiful bribes? Israel is spending the very concept of democracy so they can do a land grab and feel badass about killing some helpless people. And AOC wants to help… for some campaign donations, I assume? Or is it just to keep the powerful zionist lobby off her back… what was her price for her betraying what used to be her principles? And now that she has done it and DSA has booted her, what role does she even play anymore?

She voted against reduced funding for weapons for Israel because she would have been voting FOR funds for weapons for Israel.

Thats not what I read about what she claimed were her motivations. She said she voted against it because she was in favor of giving them defensive weapons, but not offensive ones. As if the money to buy weapons wasnt easily moved from one to the other. Weapons are weapons.

Everyone please downvote everything from rt.com. Rule 1 seems to say if they get enough downvotes they will be removed.

I see no problem with this. Do Israelis next.

deleted by creator

AOC is trying to whip up funds for when she runs next election. I’m not too thrilled that she voted against cutting funds for Israel weapons. What was she thinking. So dumb, and felt like a betrayal. And in the time since as many of her allies urged her to own up to what she did to get her support back, she chose not to. So something is keeping her quiet. Usually in the US politics thats money. I’d be curious if anyone else has other theories. I really liked her as a presidential candidate, before this.

I see your logic, but I wonder if Dem leadership is willing to do the things for the common voters they will need to do to get the voters back on side so they can win. So far I havent seen a willingness or urgency to change much of anything. I just see the dems collaborating with republicans on most votes. To be fair the progressive wing is also withering a bit (seems to me, anyway-- what do I know).

I think its time to start looking past democrats as possible agents of change. Justice delayed is justice denied, and the AIPAC centrists are firmly in control and not about to change anything. Rallying behind them just guarantees more loss, at the cost of enabling their corruption. Their base has already left to the point that they cant win anything. They have a 28% approval rating.

I wouldnt say a party of genocide supporters who love to kick progressives in the face and dont seem to give 2 shites what their voters want and need, and who have a wildly eroding base and 28% approval doesnt qualify as a:

good choice

But I guess if thats what you think I’m not going to change your mind.

yes of course history will remember Biden as a historic, effective, deeply moral president who did the right thing when times were rough, and left behind a lasting legacy of peace and progress.

Hrm I see you are correct. My bad, sorry.

both can be true at the same time.

but they still use their power differently.

Well…Do they though? On that pesky genocide (sorry I forgot–lets not call it ‘genocide’, right, that makes dems queasy-- how about we just say some people seem to have dropped dead), Bidens pretend “push back” and “negotiations” and “red lines” and “plans to build a dock to get food in and then hand it to the Israelis just like every single other land border crossing” all show that the dem centrists are simply mercenaries paid by zionists. mercenaries who take the time to put up some theatre for their evil so people dont have to acknowledge it, but the exact same outcomes happen either way. Most of the deaths and most of the building demolitions happened under Biden. When you and I start trying to parse if it was slightly faster under Trump, aren’t we missing the point?

We lost Roe under Biden, who famously never supported a womans right to choose until right before he got tapped to be VP. Strange coincidence?

Appointing Merrick Garland as AG and then pretending to be powerless while Garland proceeded to lean right and sit on his hands for 4 entire years is another example. As is cracking down on free speech. And what did Biden do in the wake of all the police murders that the defund and reallocate movement brought to his door? He said explicitly that he didnt agree with the massive movement on the left, and shut it down, actually increasing police funding as an extra “eff you” to the dem voters. Same as a republican would. Wheres this imagined difference?

And Biden famously told rooms full of rich donors at the end of Trumps term that “nothing would fundamentally change” (from Trump’s first term) under him. This emncapsulates this whole discussion perfectly. Biden swearing to the rich that nothing will change, while pretending to run on change.

This is the same Biden who shut down a rail strike, and then slowly over time negotiated a tiny fraction of what the strikers wanted, and then called it a victory on their behalf-- and then had the effing gall to walk a picket line for a photo op so his surrogates could trumpet how union-friendly he was. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/dec/01/joe-biden-rail-strike-labor-unions

Same Biden who during his term bragged about being harder on immigration than Trump ever had been-- and wore it like a badge of honor that he’d “closed the southern border”. https://jacobin.com/2024/06/biden-asylum-executive-order-border

Today centrist dems wont even admit there was ever any problem. So I guess you’d say we should change nothing and ignore the wildly eroding support and the poll numbers showing the democratic party has just 28% favorability?

There is no good/bad in capitalism.

deleted by creator