• TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    AOC has been calling for a cease fire and more aid since last year. She might not have used the word genocide until now, but it’s not like she has been cool with things up till now either.

      • Belastend@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        The only reason he did that was because it allowed him to rail against jews. Had it been done by America, Jones would have cheered.

    • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Honestly this whole drama is so immature.

      “What Israel is doing is terrible, on top of their mistreatment of the Palestinian people for decades they’ve now crossed a line and seem to be willing to remove them all from existence. This is a genocide, and we should enforce a cease fire and an embargo.”

      “What Israel is doing is terrible, on top of their mistreatment of the Palestinian people for decades they’ve now crossed a line and are killing people indiscriminately. The fact that some people are calling it a genocide is telling of the immense gravity of the situation, and we should enforce a cease fire and an embargo.”

      “How could you NOT call it a genocide??!?!?”

      Both statements are virtually the same thing, have the same worries and are calling for the same solutions, yet the later get shat on because it doesn’t virtue signal. There are lots of seemingly dumb reasons why politicians and PR departments may choose to use some terms and avoid others, and some of those decisions are mere pragmatism that doesn’t change in essence their goal or effect. I think AOC has flaws, just like almost any politician, but making a gigantic deal out of this smells like it’s been promoted by grifters looking to start drama.