politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Wow, what an argument. Look the other way and prop up the genocidal apartheid state because otherwise we might have to use blood in addition to treasure to defend imperial interests in the Middle East. Just...wow.
What reason is that exactly?
I mean, yea. You think the world is some happy go lucky place where people don't fight each other?
The US dropped two nuclear bombs on civilians in Japan to end a war quickly, and despite the backlash they'd kill civilians again in a heartbeat if it was beneficial to America. The number of civilians that died from the American invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11 shows that very clearly. The current Palestinian death toll is less than 10% of that 20 year conflict, and it was done by Americans directly.
Cuba is being used as a pawn by other countries to threaten the US, the same as it was during the cold war. Russia and China didn't write off $40 billion dollars for free over the last decade.
Umm...lol no. I think the world is run by military forces and their obedient governments.
Vaporize civilians for peace!
If by America you mean imperial warmaking and profits then yes, "they" have, would, and will continue.
This point is really confusing but....yay America?
Wow what a take. Other countries support Cuba, so the USA gets to perpetuate invasions, assassination attempts, terrorism and eternal economic warfare. The Cubans have no autonomy but also they brought this on themselves.
What happened the next day?
There would certainly be peace the day after a nuclear apocalypse too
Oddly enough, there wasn't after the bombing of Pearl harbor.
Tit for tat. Sorry our tat was bigger.
Ahh, of course, I forgot that might makes right
I don't recall ever saying that.
I apologized our boom was bigger. It was genuine. Should never have happened.
I would, however, argue that a blow designed to end combat is more ethical than one intended to wound and mame.
If you want to compare casualties then you need to compare the same periods. The average monthly casualties for the period we had data was far higher than the war on Iraq. Which is kind of to be expected since we were there for 10 years. It's also a much larger country with more people exposed to proportionally larger forces fighting.
So let's do this the right way. According to the Iraqi Body Count project around 200,000 civilians were killed. Or 0.8 percent of civilians in Iraq. In Gaza that number is 2 percent. More than double. And that's just the bodies that made it to a morgue while the health ministry was still capable of accurately counting bodies. Estimates of people who are missing, presumed dead, under the rubble are in the six figure range. So let's be generous and set the total at 100,000, so 60k under rubble, far below the estimates. That's 5 percent of the civilian population dead.
This is not a road you want to go down. Any analysis beyond the most shallow reflects extremely poorly on Israel.
Percentage of the total population is a bad stat, a dead person regardless of how many people you started with.
The point I was trying to make is that the US is clearly okay with killing civilians.
Right. Those two ratios are clearly the mark of countries with the same attitude towards civilian deaths.
If you only murder one person, does it not matter?
Death percentages do not matter to the families involved.
Ahh yes we're all in hell so why not commit a little genocide? As a treat!
All I'm saying is that the US citizenry was almost totally fine with the civilian deaths after 9/11, there were only a handful of protests in the US and a lot more support for that war than not (at the time).
If they had attacked and killed 1000 Americans on Oct 7th, there would be far more dead Palestinians, and zero university encampments.
Just how would there be more? What evidence do you have for that?
The evidence is 9/11, the US got attacked, lost almost 2000 people, and they killed around a half million civilians during the resulting fighting.
Oh you think we're far enough down the thread, I forgot we covered this already?
0.8 percent. Versus between 2 and 5 percent, generously. I can put it into per 100,000 for you if you like.
So 1% is okay for civilian deaths but 2-5% is not?
That's a pretty arbitrary cutoff.
It's a pretty huge difference in how militaries fight. For example we didn't carpet bomb entire neighborhoods in Iraq.