On the final, and most anticipated, night of the four-day Chicago convention, Harris, 59, promised to chart a “New Way Forward” as she and Trump, 78, enter the final 11 weeks of the razor-close campaign.
After days of protests from Palestinian supporters who were disappointed at not getting a speaking spot at the convention, Harris delivered a pledge to secure Israel, bring the hostages home from Gaza and end the war in the Palestinian enclave.
“Now is the time to get a hostage deal and a ceasefire deal done,” she said to cheers. “And let me be clear, I will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself and I will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself.”
“What has happened in Gaza over the past 10 months is devastating. So many innocent lives lost, desperate hungry people fleeing for safety over and over again. The scale of suffering is heartbreaking,” she said.
She/Biden can end it with a single phone call. Her words ring hollow
I didn’t realize this generational conflict was so easy to fix. Who would they call?
They would call the leader of the israeli state and threaten to stop shipping weapons. Just like it was done multiple times in the past.
When Reagan and HW Bush made this phone call, the wars ended overnight. Why wouldnt it work for Biden/Kamala?
Harris is more left than Biden, and it’s difficult to criticize someone before they even have the power to act. So it’s a tough choice, give her a chance to show how she can deescalate things there…or Trump who claims he’ll end it, period. Which he didn’t do when he had the position before, but…maybe again? Yeah, tough choice.
Calling for a ceasefire is absolutely a first step (that would be Biden you should be complaining about, Harris isn’t President yet). The wars never stopped though, those two sides would go at each other with sticks and stones (and have). Only they can fix the problems, one that was not helped at all by other European white men drawing borders long ago without any regard for the results.
Did you not listen to her acceptance speech last night? She. is far to the right of Biden, who was to the right of people like Bush and Reagan.
Reagan was able to end carpet bombing with a call. George HW. Bush was able to end carpet bombing with a call, Margaret Thatcher was able to end carpet bombing with a call. Harris could end this bombing with a call. Out of one side of their mouth, they talk cease fire. And out of the other side of their mouth, they’re saying that they’ll send more money and weapons. This is why we cannot trust them. We listen to what they say and watch what they do.
America should end it, but a phonecall isn’t gonna do that. They’d need a surgical strike on all of Israel’s nukes, as a starter.
That…would have some interesting consequences.
It’s my armchair theory that hardliner Israeli command has made it clear to the US that if they feel they cannot “defend themselves” any more, that they have a nuclear option ready to deploy against Iran.
This is not an excuse for the US stance on Israel. Not an excuse for what Israel is doing. Not an excuse for Iran’s actions or support.
but it’s my only working mental model for how Israel can act so freely. Even if the US is generally aligned with Israel’s goals (anti Hamas, anti Iran), the way they are conducting this offensive is horrific and is sucking the US in their wake. Obviously the US doesn’t care about some settlements and farms in Palestine. Obviously the US doesn’t “want” to be associated with killing civilians in this tiny strip of land that is “insignificant” to US needs. Is Israel really doing something for the US That it couldn’t do another way? If not, then what are they bargaining with?
And to head off some replies, I know, the US has killed lots of civilians. Has had lots of historic issues. Has conducted unjust war. I know. I’m only discussing this particular situation in 2024.
I’m 100% with you. It’s easy for us to judge their decision making from the outside, but if I were sitting in a classified meeting and my SoS told me, “if you turn on Israel, Netanyahu’s government will nuke Iran”, I would do everything I could do not to piss off Bibi’s government, because I’d be preventing nuclear war. If they also told me, “if you tell anyone you’re thinking about turning on Israel, Iran will nuke them because they already have a weapon”, I would do everything I could do not to reveal a hint of reservation about supporting Israel, because I’d be preventing nuclear war. I sincerely think they’ve been backed into a corner because any alternate course of action risks actual nuclear Armageddon. I think they’re less concerned with how criticism of Israel would play politically than they are about how what happens next would play politically. Maybe I’m wrong, but that situation perfectly explains a LOT of the weird posturing.
If it were a binary choice between allowing genocide and nuclear Armageddon, then I would do absolutely nothing to intervene. I would simultaneously explore EVERY diplomatic channel at my disposal to try to come up with a third option, even if it meant tens of thousands of Gazans are going to die in the process. It’s sad but true.
Yep agree
I want to highlight, and think you’ll agree:
I’m not trying to build some savior, private struggle narrative for the US DoD. They are just acting expediently for their long term goals, and we just aren’t privy to them all. And the whole “oh noes oct 7 was a tragedy!” Narrative doesn’t hold enough water for this.
Oh yeah the narratives are all performative bullshit. The DoD is absolutely evil, but in the sense that they won’t hesitate to use evil means to accomplish what they’d call “good” (i.e. self-interested) ends. Also their list of “good” ends is ludicrously expansive, but I just happen to agree with them in this instance that averting nuclear war is incontrovertibly “good.” It’s the politicians’ job to figure out how to walk out of a classified meeting and sell their decisions to the public, and that requires a lot of contorted pandering when the stakes are so high and the information so secretive and potentially catastrophic. If these weren’t two nuclear powers who wanted to erase one another from the surface of the planet, I might be more judgmental of the US government’s motives, but whether we like it or not (and thanks to the orange dipshit and his stupid fucking advisors) Iran is likely already a nuclear power. This is absolutely not a 20th century middle east conflict. This is a whole new ballgame that potentially threatens the survival of all of humanity.
Well put
…I should add, all of which makes me reeeeeeaaaallllllly frustrated with the folks who just say “Biden/Harris could stop this but they choose not to.” Like, nofuckingshit they could. But they’d be absolute morons if they ignored the potentially humanity-erasing consequences of doing so. This conflict doesn’t exist in a fucking vacuum.
/rant
It’s religion. Being harder on Israel, or even just reducing support, will have a backlash back in the US from so many believers that it would be political suicide. Seems to be the case for many hard decisions - if you as a politician play hard ball, you suffer ruining any more progress in your career to do other things. From the armchair one can call out a lot of obvious things, with the only result being a few heated replies to the comment.
That’s fine for the podium and the speeches, but I’m talking about the real work of Intel, special ops, arms transfers, the background stuff.
Edit I don’t think the DoD gives a fuck about anything about reelections and such, yet they are entangled. And I don’t mean the Colorado springs momon rah rah military, I mean the actual closed door deciders.
Man, if only Germany didn’t gift them those subs…