The acceptable level of support for genocide is exactly none
The acceptable level of support for genocide is exactly none
Alt text: a destroyed city filled with speach bubbles all saying "stop your bombs" and Kamala Harris in the foreground with "I'm speaking" in large text along the bottom.
You're viewing a single thread.
Nice strawman!
"I'm speaking" are literally her words in refence to pro-palestinian protesters chanting at one of her rallies like 2 days ago.
Edit: her campaign has at no point expressed a desire (let alone a demand) to end arms shipments and military aid to Israel. Nor has she expressed at any point that she intends to demand an immediate ceasefire if elected.
Edit2: clarification
Yes this is such a disappointment. All we want to hear is her calling and pledging for the stopping of genocide of the Palestine people.
Continuation of support for genocide.
Nice Liberal nonsense but it seems you forgot this community is for leftists
There's nothing worse for leftism than leftists making bad arguments.
Calling for the end of genocide is a bad argument? Ok Liberal
Putting words into people's mouths, as you just did, and strawmanning, as the original meme does, are both bad arguments.
Opposing genocide is a good position. Let's not weaken our good positions with bad arguments.
Kamela Harris told pro-palestinian protesters at her own rally "I'm speaking" to silence them. This is a fact and not a strawman argument. If you want your comments to not be removed from this community for supporting genocidal entities, you'll need to explain where the strawman is in the OP meme.
Please, point out the strawman here. I responded already that "I'm speaking" were Kamela's exact words in response to recent pro-palestine protesters.
The strawman is that you're attacking a position that isn't hers and implying that it is. Harris has called for an immediate ceasefire and respect for protestors. She also met with the leaders of the Michigan uncommitted movement.
The fact she hasn't called for an arms embargo means nothing, no one influential in either party has so far, and a full arms embargo would be untenable politically, the U.S. has to at least keep supplying defensive arms like the Iron Dome to appease the pro-Israel members of the U.S electorate.
Why did she release an official statement condemning the people who protested Netanyahu's recent US visit? She could have said nothing at all, but chose to attack the very people who "refuse to remain silent" about the genocide. Why didn't she take the opportunity to agree with the protestors at her rally, and condemn the ongoing genocide and the ongoing US support and enablement of it?
"a full arms embargo would be untenable politically... to appease the pro-Israel members of the U.S electorate." Is support for genocide which is against rule 5 of this community.
We do not appease genocide supporters here.
The first link you posted is how she responded after the backlash from the events of the rally mentioned in your second link. That "meeting with leaders of the uncommitted movement" provided no actual results in terms of policy changes, only placating words.
The fact that no one "influential in either party" has called for an arms embargo does not invalidate our calls to an end to the genocide. If anything, it further proves the Democratic Party's support for the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people.
Until the immediate end of all military and financial support to Israel is a part of the Harris campaign's actual platform, it is absolutely not a strawman to attribute genocide support to her.