this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
317 points (90.1% liked)

politics

19138 readers
3797 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This woman was killed with small arms fire. The US does not supply such weapons or ammo to Isreal.

[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If you look hard enough you can always find a nit to pick.

When there are billions of dollars of heavy weapons pounding the entire area to dust, it's completely disingenuous to talk about who paid for a particular bullet or gun.

The entire operation is heavily subsidized by US military donations.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A rational person would surmise that if the weapon wasn't US supplied she would have been shot in any case and weapons supplied by the US has nothing to do with the fact this is not about US politics.

But, the outrage machine doesn't look at facts.

They simply deal with hyperbolic nonsense, like your last sentance.

[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A rational person would take the information in context. The shooter was not acting in isolation. The shooter was part of an organized military that is heavily subsidized by the US government.

What's hyperbolic about the last sentence? It's an easily demonstrated fact that the US sends billions of dollars in military aid to Israel. It's an easily verified fact that this is a large portion of Israel's military budget.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The Israeli military is not subsidized by the US Government. Certain of their weapons are. This includes air frames, ordinance and assembly pieces. The rest of the military cost of other weapons, wages, training and maintenance is completely paid by the Israeli government. They can not spend the US Congress allocation on anything but US goods. Isreal builds it's own small arms, tanks, rockets, etc. With their own money.

This article has nothing to US Politics.

[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This is just insane. No normal person would doubt that arms shipments are a military subsidy.

Reply or not. I'm blocking you.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Well that was fun.