Kamala Harris says ‘I will not be silent’ on suffering in Gaza after Netanyahu talks
Kamala Harris says ‘I will not be silent’ on suffering in Gaza after Netanyahu talks
She […] denounced Hamas as a brutal terrorist organisation that triggered the war
Harris, you’re wrong and you know it. This is only the latest battle in a war that had been going on for decades.
And the word you’re not saying is genocide.
As a Canadian I feel like people who support our right wing politicians are very generous with the accuracy of what they say and their American counterparts are even more so.
Yet somehow the Progressive side is held to this unusual standard where they’re constantly painted as the villain if they’re off by the slightest bit.
In this case is more about what you would get out of Biden, Harris, Vance or Trump.
As long as she’s willing to strongly push for a ceasefire as American you got other things to worry about. And for the record I do agree it’s a genocide.
I won’t insist on each and every time, but just once would be fantastic.
I personally also don’t say it literally each and every time, but I will say that those examples as also genocide, unequivocally. That’s me on the record, you can quote me on that.
(Also I assume you mean the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the genocide of the Ukrainian people in the invaded areas, not an invasion committed by the Ukrainians, because I’m not aware of that happening anywhere.)
Yes, the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I edited for clarity.
My point is both descriptions are accurate, and sensationalism is polarizing. The wrong language could keep her out of office. This reaffirms the understanding that she’s left of Biden and miles from Trump. That may be all the conviction we get before the election. That doesn’t mean that’s all she has to offer.
Calling a genocide what it is isn’t sensationalist, regardless of whether or not you think there would be political blowback for her to state that plainly.
You’re couching an implication that describing it as a genocide is an exaggeration in pragmatic language.
Performing a genocide is trying to wipe out national, ethnical, racial or religious identity. You can do it by outright killing them, or be more sneaky and for example stealing their children and adopting them so they never learn about their heritage.
It doesn’t matter how it is done, but the result you are trying to achieve.
I’m stating that 20,000 Ukrainian children abducted by Russia and put up for adoption to be raised as Russians is genocide.
Again, the term genocide has nothing to do with severity. Why is it more important to use the term when referring to killing civilian children? Genocide can be committed without killing anyone.
It’s more clear what the atrocities are by referring to innocent women and children being bombed, than it is to simply use the word genocide.
You misunderstand. I’m saying comparing abducted Ukrainian children to killed Palestinian children is not clarified by the use of the word genocide. They are both genocides. It’s all the more reason that we should be addressing it as the tens of thousands of killed innocent civilian women and children in Gaza.
Are you aware that the Tibetan genocide has been ongoing since 1951? I’ve attended peaceful protests since the 80s on the sinicization of the Tibetan people. They are not recognized as a nation by the UN, so no nations will intervene. Nations around the world just keep buying Chinese products to fund their genocides, and look the other way.
The word genocide describes the intent, not the actions. If the intent is to eradicate a culture or people, regardless of the methods, it is considered genocide. It can be through forced indoctrination of a religion as with Tibetans, through forced adoption of a nationality as with the Ukrainians, through forced sterilization as with the Uyghurs, or through killing people as with Palestinians.
Saying “what’s happening to the Palestinians is worse than what’s happening to Ukrainians, so we should really call that genocide” displays ignorance in both the definition of the word, and comprehension of the events.
You’re the one that compared them to imply that if you call this a genocide but not this a genocide then you are not consistent than proceeded to name 3 cultural genocides (with Ukraine’s having potential to become a full blown genocide depending on how the war plays out in my opinion).
If we can’t agree that a killings-based genocide is worse than a cultural erasure genocide then there’s nothing left to talk about. Unless you believe that if the Chinese began systematically killing Tibetans tomorrow that nothing would fundamentally change in your classification.
By referring to some as cultural genocide, and others as “full-blown” genocide, you’ve clearly learned nothing from our discussion.
Maybe reading it from the World Without Genocide may help you understand.
I never said they were equal. Genocide is what they have in common. Defining the atrocities in Gaza as the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilian women and children is what sets it apart. I’ve literally written this in three different comments, yet it’s not sinking in.
Take care.
Out of curiosity, do you suppose whataboutism is going to make what Netanyahu does suddenly not be a genocide?
Do you think that because Russia and China are doing it, that makes it OK? We’re not selling Russia and China weapons to use in their genocides.
That’s funny, I actually think she has to be way more careful on the run-up to the election. After the election she can go ham if she wants . She really can’t yank the carpet out from under netanyahu’s feet before the election.
Netanyahu is clearly courting Republicans with the assumption that Trump is going to win. That was the gamble that looked a lot more certain from his perspective before Biden dropped out last week.
If only she were the current sitting vice president of the United states of America, I.e. was in a position of power where she and the other members of the executive branch could take action as well as “striking a tough tone”.
Actions, as always, speak louder than words.
The issue of Palestinian independence has been my longest standing position. I became interested in politics during the second inifada 20+ years ago. It’s been going on longer than that by a longshot.
This is the best we’ve seen in terms of statements. Let’s let her win before we condemn her for shit she can’t act on.
If she gets it and continues to pay lip service only, I’ll agree with your cynicism. Gods know 8 have enough to go around myself.
Yeah, the Knesset has signaled in no uncertain terms that they will never support a two state solution.
A two-state solution is something that sounds good to people who don’t understand the issue, the history and the geography, but the reality is that Israel will always be looking to take over the remainder of Gaza and the Westbank. The already have to a huge extent, I don’t think people realize just how much Palestine has been made into swiss cheese. You can’t make a state out if that.
It’s the apartheid state that needs to end, Israel cannot remain an ethno-state if there’s ever going to be an end to all this. Theres nowhere else on earth that we’d be arguing that it needs to be ethnically “pure”. Palestinians have been in that region as long as anyone, they need to be equal citizens with equal rights.