Last December, Vice President Kamala Harris flew to a climate conference in Dubai and quickly huddled with the leaders of three Arab nations to discuss Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip.
The conflict, by then, was still weeks old, ignited by a terrorist attack in which militants killed roughly 1,200 people in Israel and took hundreds hostage. Ms. Harris saw a diplomatic opening for herself: to be the face of the future, and not of the current war. She told the assembled leaders, “The phase of fighting will end and we will begin implementing our plans for the day after.”
Planning for the phase after the war might have seemed rhetorically out of step with President Biden, who was managing growing domestic opposition to the conflict with his embrace of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. But the visit publicly established Ms. Harris as a more compassionate voice for the administration, and she has publicly and privately been more empathetic than Mr. Biden about the plight of Palestinians in Gaza.
Still, according to U.S. officials and campaign advisers, the empathy she has expressed as vice president should not be confused with willingness to break from American foreign policy toward Israel as a presidential candidate.
I’m sure she won’t.
I’m still voting for her over the wannabe dictator who will add at least two more genocides to the world.
Same here. I’m doing the same, in any case.
That being said, I’m still hopeful that, even if they don’t call it a break from Biden, once she takes office she’ll have an updated policy towards the conflict that, while not officially dropping support for Israel, allows her to find an actual resolution to the situation, sort of a way for her to leave her unique mark on the situation without officially breaking w/ Biden.
“The conflict, by then, was still weeks old, ignited by a terrorist attack in which militants killed roughly 1,200 people in Israel and took hundreds hostage”
Not even a mention of Jabalia or the estimated 200000 death or at least the 40000 death reported last February.
I’ve leaned so much from example here, and other media, how genocide can be normalized and ignored.
Ignore in one location, and it’s not hard to imagine being ignored elsewhere later. It’s not so much as a moral irritation for me to see the reporting, as hearing a promise of violence closer home. Should circumstances permit. A wake up call.
But this did not come out of a vacuum
Few people seem to care. Most dem voters couldnt even bother to vote uncommitted in the dem primary, a completely free and risk free way to try to nudge Biden/Harris to stop taking bribes. They’ll happily get online and bloviate how everyone else is a trumper if they dont get in line and vote harris asap, and thats the extent of their backbone. Sad world. The true nature of my countryman turns out to be pretty disappointing. I’d say bring the british back to rule us but they seem no better. Whats left of civilization… France? Japan maybe? Konichi wa, please come save us from our terrible selves.
So you’re going to wait for the genocide to be complete before you take any action? By then it will be far too late.
That’s the idea.
Media Bias/Fact Check - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Media Bias/Fact Check:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceNew York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New York Times:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source
