(October 18, 2024 at 2:14 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(October 18, 2024 at 1:35 am)Belacqua Wrote: What a bizarre thing to say. Being against genocide in no way implies being pro-Trump.
It looks as though if Trump wins, he'll be equally pro-genocide. $100,000,000 from Miriam Adelson buys quite a bit of loyalty.
If Trump does win, however, it means that the genocide will no longer be Biden's genocide. It will be Trump's. And then we might finally have the Democrats speaking out against it.
The point is -- you criticize Harris for not attending the rallies the world over, but are silent on Trump not doing so as well.
All the while ignoring the fact that neither are running for president of the world.
I hereby criticize Donald Trump for not opposing genocide. He is bad. It's bizarre to me that I have to say this.
Neither is running for president of the world. Both are running for president of the country that arms and funds the genocide. That blocks all UN resolutions against Israeli crimes.
Quote:Me, I'll be happy with a President who doesn't support that genocide. I suspect Harris is more in my corner here. There's indications that we may be leaning towards cutting off weapons-supply to Israel already. I doubt that would be on the cards with Trump 2.0. They're ragheads, after all.
"indications that"... "may be leaning"...
Did you know that the word "gullible" isn't in the dictionary?
Politicians' weasel words. The Very Resolute Biden administration has said that Israel has another 30 days to continue the genocide (conveniently until after the election) and then MAYBE America will think about reducing the amount of aid. Let's all have deep faith in the election-year promises of politicians.
Both parties compete to show their support of the genocidal country. Both are bad. You know that both can be bad, right?