Quick observation: calling Palestinians "brown people" is really problematic. Like most Arabs of the levant, they come in all shades, including very very European (quite white). They are no browner on average (and I'll bet less so) than the Israelis, many of whom hail from Yemen and Ethiopia.

Here are the Arab Druze kids killed by Hezbollah. Probably half of them would fit easily in a family photo from rural Iowa.

to Quirt's contention that the election is binary ...


Harris shuts down hecklers

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
Quick observation: calling Palestinians "brown people" is really problematic. Like most Arabs of the levant, they come in all shades, including very very European (quite white). They are no browner on average (and I'll bet less so) than the Israelis, many of whom hail from Yemen and Ethiopia.

Here are the Arab Druze kids killed by Hezbollah. Probably half of them would fit easily in a family photo from rural Iowa.

I apologize for that....I was trying to express the way I have seen lot of MAGA/Trumpy folks talk about Palestinians -- certainly the MAGAs I interact wiith on a regular basis (which number far more than I'd like.)

And as we all know, the way MAGAs view many (most?) things in this world has absolutely no factual relationship to how things actually are.

I did not mean that as a slur nor do I feel that way personally. I won't edit it since you quoted it but I apologize for any offense taken for how I phrased that.

Also, those beautiful children .... just heartbreaking. The whole situation is heartbreaking for both sides.

No need to apologize. Really.

I think many people simply are unaware of the ethnic (DNA) stew in the levant.

What bothers me is when people use "brown" as an all-purpose victimization card that allows them to say all sorts of outlandish things. Ask the black people of Darfur if the half black "brown Arabs" who are murdering and raping them with glee get a pass because they're brown.

I didn't say and don't think Trump would be better for Palestinians. Trump took a number of terrible decisions on Palestine. Biden didn't lift a finger to lift any of them, btw, of course, because he is a Zionist, as he has said.

I wish people would make a proper distinction between Judaism and Zionism and stop with these constant and slurs of antisemitism. It's ignorant and tiresome.

Moving on to Harris-- Harris has not and does not have the desire or gravitas to reverse US policy on the Israeli genocide, and even if she had them, the people she we would need to rely on would never allow it. And, yes, she is complicit.

Moving on to Waltz-- he doesn't have the desire to reverse it.

So, yes, if a potential voter desires for this lawless, barbaric, evil genocide to end, then he or she has no realistic potential candidate to vote for...

And, still, some of you are missing the point.

I and some significant amount of Americans will not be complicit in genocide by voting for it.

What about Democrats and domestic policy over the last four years, taking into account they held the presidency and both houses of Congress for two years?

I'd give them an F.

They chose Biden. Biden chose Harris. Pelosi, Obama, and Shumer failed to get their 'open' convention.

It's a mess of their own making.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel:

And, still, some of you are missing the point.

I and some significant amount of Americans will not be complicit in genocide by voting for it.

.

I don't think anyone has missed this point at all. In fact from what I'm reading they get it big time. They are simply taking the next logical step and pointing out the consequences of taking a stand based on personal ethics, or as you put it, "not being complicit in genocide by voting for it".

eta: Life is a complex and interdependent process involving many entities. It is not possible to separate one decision from the whole.

We all do what we think is best.

No, wtg. You can not paraphrase my words and have your paraphrase mean the the same thing. As I put it? I'm the one saying it.

Next, no, nobody can point out the "consequences" of an individual choosing not to vote because nobody, in fact, can tell the future.

And, again, if you care about "democracy (small d)" meaning you or anyone, you would respect the choice people have to vote for their chosen candidate or not to vote.

And, if I'm wrong, then we should stop having elections, because making these decisions for other people, is a totalitarian idea, not a democratic one.

We are choosing our collective future in this election. The last few elections have been decided by a tiny handful of votes. Each vote counts, or maybe more accurately, each person's decision counts. No one is making your decision for you. Are they hoping to influence it? Well, of course. That's what healthy discussion is all about. I view the posts you've made in this thread and in your Palestine thread as your offering information that is trying to inform others and to possibly influence their thinking. Am I mistaken?

Anyway, others are sharing their analysis of the interdependencies of the situation, in part in response to the thoughts and information you've offered.

I personally love these kinds of exchanges, whether they be with people I agree with or that I don't agree with. They make me think and consider/reconsider my conclusions. But I'm not someone who feels threatened by strong opinions that do not match my own. I guess I sort of enjoy the back and forth. I always leave those discussions feeling richer for the experience. They either reinforce my thinking, because I've heard nothing new that changes my analysis. Or I incorporate good arguments into my analysis and decide whether to modify my thinking.

quote:

Next, no, nobody can point out the "consequences" of an individual choosing not to vote because nobody, in fact, can tell the future.

I would say "possible consequences" and I think that's what others have meant in their comments; they can correct me if I'm wrong.

Of course no one can tell the future. But if Trump wins, we have some idea of how he would govern and what our lives might look like. If Harris wins, I'm pretty sure it won't be the same path.

I think that's the point that people are trying to make.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel:

I and some significant amount of Americans will not be complicit in genocide by voting for it.

So, even though there would be no improvement on Palestine under a second Trump Administration, you are willing to allow hundreds of millions of Americans (women are half the population, and they are not the only ones) to suffer pain, hardship and degradation, because you don't want to be "complicit".

Got it.

I am not attempting to persuade you, because I view you as unpersuadable.

You and that "significant amount" of Americans are free to vote for whomever you wish. And I am free to scorn all of you. And I will be free, if Trump is elected in November, to remind all of you that this is on your heads and that you are complicit in everything he does when he does the despicable things that he plans to do. Because, after all, you've just explained to us that voting for someone makes the voter complicit in the candidate's policies.

Well, you're right and wrong about my Palestine thread. Its primary purpose is that I want to speak about it. I can't control what is happening there but I don't want to be silent. It's not much but it's something. Yes, you are right that I want to inform people. But, actually, no, the purpose of my thread has nothing to do with trying to influence others how to vote.

wtg, I was going to tell you I didn't appreciate your snarkiness but then I realized I was reading Quirt's post. Lol.

+1 Quirt

quote:

Originally posted by QuirtEvans:
Put against each other, they do look inconsistent. Let me try to clarify.

Thanks, QuirtEvans.

There's a problem with your analysis, Quirt. I'm not voting. It's none of your business whom I vote for or whether I vote. You're starting to sound like someone from the USSR with all of your judgments about party loyalty.