Other Sources.
President Donald Trump said the US military struck three Iranian nuclear sites as the United States entered the conflict between Israel and Iran, raising fears of a wider war in the Middle East.
Israel and Iran traded new missile attacks early on June 22, in the hours after the US strikes, and Iran’s foreign minister said Tehran “reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people” following what he described as an “outrageous” step by the United States.
Several world leaders called for a renewal of negotiations, with some in the West stressing that Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons, and the UN chief cautioned of a “growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control.”
Trump announced what he called a “spectacular military success” on June 21, saying US bombers hit nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan in a joint effort with Israel to destroy Iran’s nuclear program after diplomacy failed to get Tehran to return to the negotiating table.
Obviously she is, but what’s happening now are the consequences of their actions. So I figured they’d either be “damn, I made a huge mistake” or justifying why this is a good thing.
In that case you must not be looking very hard, because I see these arguments every other thread. In case you actually don’t see this stuff, long story short the arguments boil down to “See? We fucking told you centrism wasn’t going to work,” “so genocide is bad now that Trump is doing it,” “the heck are you blaming us for? It was the moderates who stayed home” and “there were either enough progressives to sway the election or not enough to listen to them, you can’t have it both ways”. Also, though I haven’t seen this one much from other people, here’s me in this thread:
Because they’re not a good choice. They’re just the better choice.
But being against them is still an idiotic move. It’s called strategic voting.
Only if you only think four years into the future and don’t think of how to actually get your way out of this mess, but either way we should be able to agree that the “can’t vote for Kamala because war” people are not, in fact, quiet.
Oh yeah, you’re the best example that they’ve got a direct line of copium to their home.
I guess helping to get Trump elected was a brilliant move for the future! Bright times ahead after his 4 years.
Notice how they got you talking about Democrats instead of Republicans. Be careful, don’t let them distract you.
Republicans are the problem at hand. Have been for decades.
That’s exactly my point, thank you!
Okay if you think Pelosi isn’t part of the problem I have a bridge to sell you.
Is she the one who just bombed Iran?
Is she the one with unidentifiable ICE agents shoving people into unmarked vans?
Is she in the room with us right now?
This both sides nonsense is so fucking pathetic right now.
Your argument, if it can even be called that, isn’t proving anything at all. Pelosi isn’t doing these particular things, but she has her own list of crimes.
A lot of people can die in four years while you’re trying to figure shit out.
A lot of people can also die when fascism takes over because you didn’t try to figure shit out, and that’s the problem with vote blue no matter who: Democrats are woefully underequipped to stop fascism, so allowing them to coopt all left-leaning voices was always going to end in disaster. Coercing the Democrats into becoming less horrible was the only way to get out of this with American democracy intact, but that requires taking a more antagonistic stance than “vote blue no matter who”.
I agree with you, but you can do both things. You can vote for the lesser evil while working towards a party that actually represents leftists ideals. The all or nothing mindset is why we have a fascist in office currently.
Here’s the thing: To work towards such a party you need to have both a carrot and a stick; surrendering unconditionally and hoping they’ll generously grant you the opportunity to represent your leftwing ideals was always folly. In 2024 the DNC basically gave a massive middle finger to progressives, multiple in fact, which was going to lead to disaster if someone somewhere didn’t whack them over the head and force them to change course. Uncommitted was supposed to be that, but they were met with scorn by people who kept screaming “vote blue no matter who.” Well here’s the thing: “vote blue no matter who” destroys Democrat turnout, because to your average voter voting for a party that stands for nothing is a very hard sell. It was change the Democrats while there was still time or bust, and America chose bust. There was no winning with a Democratic party that, to reiterate, stood and still stands for nothing.
Non-voters were predominantly moderates, not leftists, so no. The people you’re trying to criticize here for the most part voted for Harris.
And your solution is knowing they’re under equipped and knowingly helping fascism to power regardless?
Sounds stupid.
The thing is: There are people who are well-equipped to stop fascism; the Democrats just hate their guts. Forcing the Democrats to accept those people and their ideas was the only way forward, which is what people like Uncommitted tried to do and were met with scorn for. Now we’re at the only logical conclusion of “vote blue no matter who”.
You’re a prime example of not letting things get better because they won’t be perfect. You’re part of the problem.