In a Fox News segment on Tuesday morning, former President Donald Trump appeared to suggest that he is supportive of the genocidal extermination of Palestinians living in Gaza.
[…]
Kilmeade then asked Trump: “Are you on-board with the way the [Israel Defense Force] is taking the fight to Gaza?”
[…]
Trump’s response seemed to suggest that he supported the genocide of people living in Gaza. “You’ve got to finish the problem,” he said.
In additional comments regarding Israel’s attacks, Trump appeared unwilling to differentiate between the governing body of Hamas and the Palestinian population more generally. He went on to claim that, were he still president, the October 7 attack never would have happened, and that Hamas only attacked Israel because of Biden’s purported weakness.
“They wouldn’t have done it to me, I guarantee you that,” Trump added.
Trump literally thinks and says he’d be doing genocide better right now if he were still president.
We have one person who likely would be genocidal, and one we know would be genocidal.
You’re threatening people not willing to vote for a proven genocidaire with a probable genocidaire.
You get why that isn’t a threat, right? You do understand that the one who is proven already to be genocidal is worse than the person who is probably genocidal, right?
We THINK Trump would be. Personally, I think he would get bored. Trump is lazy. Biden is doing a lot of work to get weapons and money, bypassing various laws, to the Israelis. Israel cannot continue this war without us. We could end it tomorrow. Biden is doing a lot of active work to make sure it continues.
I don’t give half a rats ass if Biden isn’t “proud” of his actions if he continues the hard work of making sure this genocide continues.
Also, if the Democratic Party was as afraid of a Trump presidency as they claim everyone should be, they wouldn’t hand the election to him on a silver fucking platter to continue a fucking genocide.
I’m not going to vote for Trump, I’m not pro Trump, but at this point, I don’t see a path to victory for Biden. Not one. And it’s the Democratic Parties fault, not the fault of leftists, as I know everyone is going to say once he does lose.
“Basic logic” in a philosophical sense, sure. But it seems removed from reality.
Frankly, I don’t think this is about Biden or Trump. It’s about the US. But either way, there’s a difference between the person who is doing it, and the person who explicitly says they would also be doing it, and doing it more.
Maybe the US is already at maximum capacity for what it can do for Israel. Then there’s no difference between Trump and Biden.
Maybe under Trump, more money and resources would be diverted to Israel (e.g. stopping all support for Ukraine). Then it’d be worse under Trump.
I think that the position of “Maybe Trump wouldn’t do genocide even though he said he would and also said he’d do a better job of Palestine” exists only in some absurd fantasy. Realistically, you have a choice between “The same amount of genocide” and “The same OR MORE amount of genocide”.
If you’re okay with the same or more genocide just to spite the same amount of genocide, then that’s your prerogative. It seems silly to me though to be a single issue voter and be okay with the one who wants to make your single issue worse.
If my single issue was abortion rights, I’d choose the one who wants to restrict abortion access rather than help win the election for the one who wants to outright ban abortion. I would lament the lack of an option that better represents what I want, but I’d choose a step forward over a step back. Or even not taking a step over a step back.
Trump literally thinks and says he’d be doing genocide better right now if he were still president.
We have one person who likely would be genocidal, and one we know would be genocidal.
You’re threatening people not willing to vote for a proven genocidaire with a probable genocidaire.
You get why that isn’t a threat, right? You do understand that the one who is proven already to be genocidal is worse than the person who is probably genocidal, right?
The ONLY way that Trump would not continue the genocide in Palestine if elected is if it were already done.
I haven’t been following any statements by Biden, but he doesn’t exactly seem proud about the genocide. Trump is.
It’s not like I’m saying “He’s a Republican, of course he’d support Israel!”. There is evidence against Trump personally.
Jesus, this is basic logic.
We KNOW Biden is.
We THINK Trump would be. Personally, I think he would get bored. Trump is lazy. Biden is doing a lot of work to get weapons and money, bypassing various laws, to the Israelis. Israel cannot continue this war without us. We could end it tomorrow. Biden is doing a lot of active work to make sure it continues.
I don’t give half a rats ass if Biden isn’t “proud” of his actions if he continues the hard work of making sure this genocide continues.
Also, if the Democratic Party was as afraid of a Trump presidency as they claim everyone should be, they wouldn’t hand the election to him on a silver fucking platter to continue a fucking genocide.
I’m not going to vote for Trump, I’m not pro Trump, but at this point, I don’t see a path to victory for Biden. Not one. And it’s the Democratic Parties fault, not the fault of leftists, as I know everyone is going to say once he does lose.
“Basic logic” in a philosophical sense, sure. But it seems removed from reality.
Frankly, I don’t think this is about Biden or Trump. It’s about the US. But either way, there’s a difference between the person who is doing it, and the person who explicitly says they would also be doing it, and doing it more.
Maybe the US is already at maximum capacity for what it can do for Israel. Then there’s no difference between Trump and Biden.
Maybe under Trump, more money and resources would be diverted to Israel (e.g. stopping all support for Ukraine). Then it’d be worse under Trump.
I think that the position of “Maybe Trump wouldn’t do genocide even though he said he would and also said he’d do a better job of Palestine” exists only in some absurd fantasy. Realistically, you have a choice between “The same amount of genocide” and “The same OR MORE amount of genocide”.
If you’re okay with the same or more genocide just to spite the same amount of genocide, then that’s your prerogative. It seems silly to me though to be a single issue voter and be okay with the one who wants to make your single issue worse.
If my single issue was abortion rights, I’d choose the one who wants to restrict abortion access rather than help win the election for the one who wants to outright ban abortion. I would lament the lack of an option that better represents what I want, but I’d choose a step forward over a step back. Or even not taking a step over a step back.
Removed by mod