629
Trump gave ‘green light’ to Israel before Gaza bombing that left ‘400 dead,’ report says
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2025
629 points (99.4% liked)
politics
22131 readers
3922 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
...yet i was told that the biden genocide was somehow worse...cake and eat it shit.....
I was told that protest voting would save Gaza, is Gaza saved? /s
Nothing was going to save Gaza. That didn't mean we needed to continue being complicit. But at least centrists didn't have to consider abandoning netanyahu.
You know who could have saved gaza?
Biden, two years ago.
Scumbag
Unsupporting the red and blue party is the correct thing to do and what will ultimately lead to a positive change. The duopoly party narrative is holding on a really thin line because everyone is unsatisfied on both sides, in europe third parties win plenty of times.
If you throw your trash out of the window that isn't going to change world pollution but you don't do that because we live in a society and everyone is supposed to do his part.
The way US elections work it's mathematically impossible to have a viable 3rd party. We can't just do it like Europe.
how is it mathematically impossible?
Most US elections, in particular the Presidential one, are first past the post and winner take all. There's no coalitions or anything. Only one party can win. If the Democrats, for example, split into a Moderates and a Progressives party, the election landscape will go from this:
Democrats ~50%
Republicans ~50%
To this:
Moderates ~30%
Progressives ~20%
Republicans ~50%
And Republicans are guaranteed a win. The Republicans don't win 50% of the government, they get the whole government. Progressives and Moderates get nothing. The only possible way to defeat the Republicans is by combining the Progressives and Moderates into a single party.
Who wins in this scenario?
The third party. And if the Democrats and Republicans ever want to be viable again, they'll have to join with each other or with the 3rd party, depending on which is closer ideologically. So we're back to 2 parties.
And by the way, support for any 3rd parties in the US is currently at less than 5%, nowhere close to the >50‰ required to make this scenario plausible. It has happened before, though not in the last 150 years, usually with the total collapse of one of the two parties. Andrew Jackson personally caused the collapse of the existing parties by basically turning them into pro-Jackson and anti-Jackson parties. And then a few decades later the anti-Jackson party itself completely split over the question of slavery, and then the Civil War created the two parties we have today, Democrats and Republicans. The two parties almost completely swapped supporters and positions in the 1960s due to Nixon's "Southern Strategy", but the two ideological groups of voters have been the same since the mid-1800s even though they've changed names.
Then it's not mathematically impossible that a third party wins you are making up bullshit. In europe brand new parties win elections all the time
Maybe if you read more than literally the first 3 fucking words of my post, you'd realize how utterly stupid you're sounding right now.
It's easier than you think as i said already it happens in europe all the time.
And as I FUCKING EXPLAINED, it does not work like that in the US.
Biden’s help killed more at this time, but Trump should catch up by late summer or early autumn this year. Then we can say Trump killed more than Biden.
But Trumps crimes elsewhere will eclipse this grim milestone , and I doubt most commentators here will remark on that when it happens
Is there a tally for each president?
Yes, kind of, if one follows these things enough
I have this idea for a site like a high score thing, where you could (with citations provided) the kill total of world leaders. See how Stalin, Hitler and Mao stack up to Nixon, Bush, Clinton and Trump.
Where it gets difficult to estimate is when people die many years later from the effects.
Even hurricanes are only recently understood to be a huge cause of mortality over a decade later. So where does one draw the line? When support structures in a society are destroyed by nature or man things happen years later.
And then one had to decide how many a leader is directly responsible for, and how many subordinates acting on their own did.
We'd have to adjust for population growth. Genghis Khan is probably still the reigning genocide champ.
What a strawman of an argument you’ve created. That was never an argument being made, it was that genocide wouldn’t be any worse because genocide is genocide.
And how is this at all different from any of the strikes Biden agreed on that resulted in mass deaths?
Oh and the cake you’re laughing about? Those are children’s lives. Get some perspective and stop reveling in misery.
That's dumb. Killing more people is worse than killing fewer.
That's awfully disrespectful for the people who lost relatives before Trump got elected.
You're a salty scumbag and you deserved to lose
That's an awfully disrespectful thing to say, Nazi
It’s more dumb to think killing everyone is any different to killing everyone.
Genocide brings about the death of the whole cultural group.
There is no little or big genocide, it is all genocide.
Ok, then by your definition there hasn't BEEN any genocide because they're not literally all dead yet, so why are you complaining at all,
This is the dumbest take in this thread so far.
That's my fucking point, dumbass. It's a stupid-ass way of thinking.
Yeah funny how you guys always need idiotic sarcasm and mental gymnastic to close the cognitive dissonance of having voted for a war criminal.
Remember all those trolley memes?
You're american. You're not attached to the track. You're ON the fucking trolley discussing who you should sacrifice to go where it's most convenient for you.
Inhumane scum
That's my fucking point, dumbass. It's a stupid-ass way of thinking.
Bullshit. It was absolutely an argument being made. "We kNoW BiDeN sUpPoRtS gEnOcIde; MaYbE tRuMp WiLl Be BeTtEr" (paraphrased) is very much the sort of dumbass rhetoric that was being tossed around and don't you dare try to gaslight me otherwise!
Put yourself in the shoe of somebody who lost a relative in Gaza.
Aah that's right, you can't. Americans aren't educated to see foreigners as human at all. The more i talk with you guys the more i realize that
So people who lost relatives in Gaza want it to happen more‽ Because that's what they got by helping Trump win!
Also, fuck you for making assumptions about me.
You gotta love the inversion of value. Voting for a genocider is good. Water is dry. War is peace.
Really smell like 1985 in here
You're just mad that trump is implementing centrists' only policy.
Centrists are stubbornly determined to move right from here. Introspection is a threat to that, so they won't.