But it says nothing about methods of attack?

Edit: The article suggests they are air strikes: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/9/25/mapping-10000-cross-border-attacks-between-israel-and-lebanon

Happy to see a source if I’m wrong!

Lol what? Where did you get that?

God of the Dead from Hades!

What do you mean?

Literally. Many people seem to have forgotten all the lessons from 9/11 and the clusterfuck that followed

The genocidiers have us by the balls, folks. Nothing you can do but voice your full throated support for one of them.

Not only that, you must also shout down anybody who says they don’t want to support genocide. Only full loyalty is acceptable.

Oh so you’re likely voting dem anyway because you aren’t stupid and/or racist but you also say Harris should abide by US law and stop arms sales to Israel? WOW LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A TRUMP SUPPORTER HERE BOYS

You will likely get the accusations anywhere you are omitting the part about voting for Harris despite opposing an endorsement.

Yeah absolutely. But I don’t really see why anyone should need to add a voting disclaimer if they are criticising the government’s support for a genocide. People can downvote all they want, some things are just more important than party politics.

That is due to the prolific MAGA campaigners on here urging people to vote third party and using this issue as the reason.

Yeah I’m sure there are such people and they can get fucked. But in my experience the people receiving these accusations mainly just don’t want the government to support Israel unconditionally. But as you said, without the disclaimer, these people are accused of a bunch of stuff.

Is it really so hard for people to believe that others actually just care about preventing mass murder? The fact someone can say something like that and get many responses talking about Trump and the electoral college system rather than acknowledging the legitimacy of the problem being raised is truly disgusting to me.

What makes you say that? Is there something I’m missing?

The Uncommitted group “opposes a Donald Trump presidency, whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing,” the statement continues. Additionally, the group is “not recommending a third-party vote in the Presidential election, especially as third party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency given our country’s broken electoral college system.”

I agree with them. Including about this:

Vice President Harris’s unwillingness to shift on unconditional weapons policy or to even make a clear campaign statement in support of upholding existing U.S. and international human rights law has made it impossible for us to endorse her

Although I would say obviously people should still vote for her because the political system is broken.

I was responding to this “news” because it is what many of us have been saying the whole time, only to be met with accusations that this must mean we think trump is better. Obviously he would be much worse for this and everything else. But that doesn’t excuse the dems position.

Sure, we can criticise Team Blue for slow-dragging their feet on protecting Palestinians.

Incredibly generous way to put it. They are providing the weapons that maim and kill the innocent children. I criticise them for the blood on their hands

Unsurprising. While people opposed to any criticism of the democrats’ self defeating and inhumane policy on this issue like to pretend it’s all a pro Trump psy op, it’s actually more of a DON’T SUPPORT GENOCIDE YOU EVIL FUCKS type of thing.

But for the dems it’s fine because the electoral college has the whole country by the balls I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ who are you going to vote for dumb dumb? Orange hitler? Spoiler candidates? Lol didn’t think so, send the bombs boyos

Yeah I totally understand where you’re coming from. The problem is the first past the post system, but changing to another one isn’t in the interest of the major parties so it’s unlikely they’ll do it.

You’re right that this kind of thinking is why third parties have a tough time. But if you do vote third party, most other people still won’t and you will just take away from your preferred option out of the two main parties. It’s a terrible system where the fear of the spoiler effect takes any chance away from other candidates and from the voters who they represent. Ross Perot was the most successful 3rd party candidate in recent memory and he wasn’t even close to winning.

Literally the only way out is to force the issue through protest etc.

But honestly I would never criticise you for not wanting to vote for these people. I totally get it. My disclaimer was a semi joke intended to keep people from turning my criticism of the dems into a conversation about Trump and the election

Thanks! What part do you disagree with? On the merits of 3rd party voting?

DISCLAIMER: America has a two party system. In the current political climate, both parties are supportive of Israel and voting therefore offers no way to solve this issue. Trump is also worse than Harris on this issue. Not voting or choosing 3rd party only helps the republicans, and if you don’t agree with their platform, the only rational electoral choice is to vote blue. While you may disagree with some policies, one has to make a pragmatic decision on election day. Voting is a chess move not a love letter. The death will continue regardless, we have no power to stop it.

Now that’s over…

Wow wouldn’t it be nice if the democratic party didn’t insist on arming an active genocide and alienating large numbers of would be voters through their uncritical support of an apartheid state.

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could have a candidate who did not support acts which are fundamentally evil

I think you could just ask something like “what are some of your favourite world cuisines excluding the obvious ones?” and then explain what you mean.

Apologies though, I guess this is just because it’s not your first language, what you said makes sense it’s more the connotations of the phrase. I think someone also posted a gif making a similar joke. Probably the best straight up alternative without the connotations would be “world food/cuisine.”

North Korean! Would love to try it but I guess similar to South Korean food?

I don’t want to go through all but some of the more interesting ones:

Ethiopian - delicious stew/curry type food with this fermented flatbread stuff that almost smells a bit like beer. Way better than this makes it sound, lol

Vietnamese - if you like Chinese food you will love it. It’s somewhere between Thai and Chinese. They have an awesome beef noodle soup called pho

Jamaican - my family is partially from here so bias but jerk chicken is worth a mention alone. Very well spiced and usually super juicy chicken. Meat and rice type of stuff. But ackee and saltfish is interesting too, very salted cod mixed with this subtle flavoured fruit that looks a bit like eggs? Again better than it sounds.

Moroccan - If you’re interested in Egyptian food (I also have no idea what that would be, lol) Morrocan is probably a good recommendation. They have a dish called tajine which is a well spiced chicken stew, they cook it in a special pot I think

Mexican! - I know it’s obvious but in Europe Mexican restaurants are very basic. Tacos, burritos etc. But there are so many amazing dishes like mole (chocolate and chilli sauce, fucking delicious) that always get missed. There’s one called queso relleño (?) That is basically like a very rich Bolognese wrapped in cheese and FRIED. Probably best not to eat too often. But maybe you guys in the US get more authentic Mexican food anyway

Also, saying “ethnic foods” comes across a little odd. Makes you sound like a 50 year old white guy who’s never left his home town and isn’t so sure about all this weird food these strange brown people eat. Nothing wrong with being white or culturally insulated of course, but probably not the look you were going for. Might explain the downvotes.

We also rate them High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record.

Why not “very high” then?

MBFC:

Thanks! That’s interesting. So because they are technically sales it’s under the commercial system, but it sounds like the Biden era policy has rules about this type of thing for those too. And also, aren’t these “sales” actually coming from US aid packages anyway?

Really seems like the rules could be applied consistently to justify stopping supporting this:

Well, the State Department has said publicly that the same policy applies to Israel as apply to every other country. In practice, Israel gets special treatment. In practice, arms transfers that, given similar conduct by any other country would not be allowed, are being allowed for Israel. You may recall the Biden administration suspended items that could be used in offensive air-to-ground operations for Saudi Arabia because they were causing civilian casualties. Those civilian casualties are nowhere near the civilian casualties that Israeli air-to-ground operations have caused so far. Yet unconditional transfers of air-to-ground munitions continue.

They can’t just stop giving weapons completely as it is literally illegal.

What about the Leahy laws? Isn’t it illegal to continue?

Yeah that explains his views on vaccines alright