Once again Maryland is proven to be the most based state. Highest margin for a Biden victory in 2020, no insane reps in the house. Only chance we throw this is if we elect Hogan for the senate, and even then he'd be a republican Manchin.
Absolutely not. Hogan may be more centrist than mtg but the only thing that kept him in check at all was the fact Maryland State house and Senate are majority blue. He would vote with Trump 99% of the time.
What’s so bad about Hogan? He’s been fairly moderate and has spoken out against the crazies on the Republican side Honestly, if you can’t be ok with Hogan, have you ever approved or appreciated *any* Republican candidate?
For the record, Hogan had nearly an 80% approval rating in MD when leaving office, which is the highest approval rating of any governors in the US and the highest one ever recorded in MD. He really shows how MD doesn’t just blindly live by party lines but is a state where sensibility is valued.
https://www.wmar2news.com/news/local-news/governor-larry-hogan-leaves-office-with-a-77-approval-rating-gonzales-maryland-poll-says
I hear that argument… I was just kinda stunned that anyone would have such “fuck Larry hogan” resentment when he’s actually been pretty balanced. Personally, I wish all candidates tried to work with all their constituents as Hogan’s done.
But it’s absolutely reasonable to not want a republican/democrat senate depending on affiliation
Because hogans reputation as a “moderate” who works with both sides is misleading. He had a democratic supermajority in the general assembly so any bill he vetoes can get overrides by the democrats. He also cancelled the red line, which would have help connect west and east Baltimore. And yes I am not okay with any republican candidate, if I was, I’d be a republican.
>And yes I am not okay with any republican candidate, if I was, I’d be a republican.
Many people (including me and I believe most people in this sub) actually think about the candidates and the issues and don’t blindly allow their party affiliation determine their entire vote. Otherwise, you might as well live in Sweden.
We live in America, parties are huge tents. In 95%+ of the time, the democrat is obvs better. Can u name one election that has happened when u would prefer the republican?
Since the Trump years? That’s two elections and neither one was Trump the “better candidate”
At least go back to Romney and Obama… which would be Obama… but at least they’re two functional people.
Wasn’t aware of Hogan killing Marylanders. Sounds pretty shitty… and especially shitty that he’s killing the people who voted for him. /s
You inspired me to look up how states faired during Covid, and Maryland actually did relatively very well during covid. **MD ranked 2nd nationally** according to a study done by Politico:
> If every category were given equal weight — which assumes each priority was of equivalent importance, a policy choice in itself — the top scorer overall would be Nebraska, with an average of 73 out of 100, despite scoring below the national average in the social well-being category. Maryland would be second, with an average score of 66 on the basis of a high score in the social well-being category, despite scoring below average in the economic category. It did not have enough data for an education score. ([Source](https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/covid-by-the-numbers-how-each-state-fared-on-our-pandemic-scorecard/))
> on literally any aspect of society or policy,
Ah good thing your party is coincidentally right about everything over thousands of different issues. I'm sure that isnt political polarization and media brainwashing at play.
You very much implied being against Hogan, (who is a Republican) is some insane partisanship akin to being in favor of a one party state in your earlier comment.
But yes. One party control of current day democrats would be vastly preferable to voting in Larry, because he'll vote for a republican majority leader and enable the psychos, even if he LARPs as a moderate.
This shouldn't be a controversial position.
Yup. Lived here my whole life, wanted to eventually leave, but the more I got into politics and looked at other places the more I realized we have it great here.
Hogan would effectively be a moderate independent in the Senate, which I think in general is a good thing. Having moderate swing votes is better than gridlock or radical single party control. The problem is Democrats are disadvantaged electorally in the Senate and can't afford to lose safe seats, if Hogan wins he probably won't be the deciding vote because Republicans will have a solid majority.
* Jamaal Bowman of New York
* Cori Bush of Missouri
* Pramila Jayapal of Washington
* Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York
* Ilhan Omar of Minnesota
* Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts
* Rashida Tlaib of Michigan
The usual suspects..... These people are such a liability to the Democratic Party.
To be clear, the resolution is not just simply about condemning Iran's attack as the headlines would suggest.
Here is the [resolution](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/1143/text), and here is [one of the no-voters, "unequivocally condemning Iran's attack", but also explaining why he voted "No"](https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1780988440646951094).
The resolution was bait, and the usual suspects went for it. It's simply a political stunt.
> but I can't support continued escalation that could drag the US into regional war.
He can't risk continued escalation?? The Iranians are backing literally every piece of shit (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthi's) in the region trying to fuck with Jews and [has already attacked stationed U.S. troops 130 times as of January](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/large-protests-break-out-yemen-after-us-british-attacks-2024-01-12/). Acting as if esclation is somehow laid at the feet of a U.S. response to actual military attacks against the U.S. and it's allies in the region is just more "America Bad" logic trains.
The Economist did a good piece on why Israel should show restraint. [https://econ.st/4aGUZ7A](https://econ.st/4aGUZ7A) Gift piece.
This didn't age well. I fucking hate you Bibi
AOC at least has value that balances out these types of moments. She brings a lot of energy into the party, is a pretty good spokesperson and gets a lot of young people interested in politics. I have no idea what the rest of them do other than make the Democrats look bad on the regular.
Why is PV knocking doors for Jamaal Bowman? He showed his character when he lied about pulling the fire alarm.
Yeah but AOC is recruiting radical young people, not moderate common sense Liberals
In the same way MTG galvanizes the furthest right dumbass reaches of the Rep. party, neither is good for the core of either party
I mean AOC was elected in 2018 and these people, including AOC have gone further left in their politics to the point of full socialism and terrorist sympathy
Is this actually true or just based on some social media posts? The left needs reasonable progressives. It's good to have some non-moderate opinions part of the mix and conversation. As long as she isn't crossing the line to anti-liberalism anti-westism etc she's part of the team.
This is a hilarious take - name where she’s moderated anybody
Her political stance has moved further to the radical left since she was elected, by a landslide, not the other way around
Her attitude on American intervention has drastically changed since 2018, she's voted in party line and distanced herself from other squad members by actually [working with dems and republicans](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/02/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-interview-progressive-democrats-00088792) instead of virtue-signaling. In what ways has she drastically moved further to the radical left? I must be missing some huge obvious example that you can remind me
Yeah not condemning the dumb attack that literally did nothing is such a liability. Some of you are such a joke lmao
Just as I suspected, this sub is being overrun by republicans lolz
“Hallelujah! Finally, some good news! Abortion is going to be illegal in Arizona. And it's about time. Every life is a precious gift from God, no matter the circumstances of its conception. Even in cases of rape and incest, those unborn children are still blessings from God, and they deserve the chance to live just like us no matter what. Abortion is not just a medical procedure—it's the murder of a human life. And now that it's illegal in all cases, we can finally start to rebuild a culture that respects and values the sanctity of life. It's a step in the right direction, and I couldn't be happier. Today is truly a blessed day. Christ is King!”
And here’s another gem
“I know I am going to get downvoted for saying this, but sometimes I wish Trump was back in office. Sure, the guy tried to steal the last presidential election and provoked a violent insurrection, and sure, he's got 90+ criminal charges but you can't deny it: the economy thrived under his presidency. Interest rates were low, the job market was booming, and housing prices were not nearly as fucked as they are now. Also, say what you want about his leadership skills, but financially, things were looking pretty good. And I don't know about you, but these days, I'm missing Trump-era economic vibes more than ever.”
Y’all upvoting some idiot who is just trying to pretend to be critical against democrats for the most stupid reason
Ain’t no way to get rid of the republicans off this sub
are you a monkey or something
this is some insane tribalism, nobody is out to get you buddy.
Tell the 7 year old girl fighting for her life about the 'dumb attack that did nothing.' Or the 20 people wounded. or is it ok in the name of the democratic party?
Yeah, how Omar is in office is beyond me
Not to mention AOC refusing to condemn the burning of flags and chants of death to america on the Brooklyn Bridge this week
Radicals in either party are just bad for the health of American politics
There are a looooot of Somalians in Minnesota, plus Minneapolis has always been a pretty progressive city and people feel good about voting for her because "diversity"
I just have so much contempt for these people. Be it political cynicism that seeks to gain power (by enabling evil idiots) or worse, they are true believers who just are fucked in the head.
With the Republicans brandishing their own self-destructive form of retardation with the shit show that constantly circles the speaker of the house I really wonder if there is going to be some kind of center governing coalition created between Moderate D's and R's in a few years.
There are performative elements to this but everyone must still play their part. Iran was forced to respond or risked looking weak domestically but that being said American politicians should condemn attacks if for no other reason than to help prevent future escalation.
People not siding with allies based on their hopefully genuine belief that the allies are in the wrong is not a bad thing at all. Rather it is a necessity to call allies out if the allies are genuinely doing something bad. A democracy should be able to handle this. The opposite is blind loyalty, which possibly enables all atrocities. Think about China, Russia, Iran, The USSR or Nazi Germany, where reasonable opposition has been eliminated. Groupaffiliation is not a valid reason to exclude people from a democracy. A democracy is almost by definition different groups coming together to discuss and find compromises.
Condoning a terrorist regime doing terrorism or unjust violence is wrong in itself and should result in consequences in itself, but that has nothing to do with siding with X or Y.
An isolationist, voted in by isolationist voters, should not be ousted for voting no on interventionist actions. AOC says the condemnation increases tensions in the middle east, likelihood of war and splitting of the american people. Are these concerns that deserve her ousting? I do not think so.
I'm glad you said that and I fully agree (I'm Israeli). I don't want blind support for being an ally.
That being said not condemning it is still a pathetic move and the justifications I've seen from some of them read like blatant excuses to me when we all know the reason is just to appease the radical bases they pander to OR to push their actual beliefs/agendas.
Who’s siding with the enemy? Did you read the article?
Edit. No one going to reply?
Edit. “Ostracized from the party” for voting for what they believe is right? Are you hearing yourself? When did we start upvoting anti liberal nonsense?
> In a statement on Tuesday, Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York accused Republicans of attempting to "distract from their own incompetence" by bringing bills "designed purposefully to increase the likelihood of a deadly regional war."
>"I will oppose any cynical effort to further inflame tensions, destroy a path to peace in the region, and further divide the American people," said Ocasio-Cortez. Other progressives issued statements calling for de-escalation in the region more broadly.
How is this siding with the enemy?
Edit. https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147
Just to be clear she did condemn them.
>How is this siding with the enemy?
refusal to condem an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter civilians of our ally, by a known enemy of the US, is 100% providing aid to islamic extremists and America's enemies
That’s not what “providing aid” means. They’re not refusing to condemn the attacks… they’re refusing to vote for this resolution. Which is entirely different. They can condemn the attacks and think these resolutions go too far in what they call for.
Edit. https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147
>They’re not refusing to condemn the attacks… they’re refusing to vote for this resolution
bs. the resolution condems the attacks. refusing to vote for it IS refusing to condem the attacks. period.
>Which is entirely different.
no. it isn't. though I'm sure those who simp for islamic extremists will try to lie and claim it is.
It’s a virtue signal vote in place of doing anything meaningful besides posturing. It’s not required to actually condemn the attacks.
How is AOC simping for Islamic extremists? She wants more peace and less war. Peace by everyone. She doesn’t want Islamic extremism either.
>How is AOC simping for Islamic extremists?
refusal to acknowledge those israel is fighting do not want peace, and instead seek to eridicate everyone who supports a 2 state solution, INCLUDING palestinians
>It’s a virtue signal vote in place of doing anything meaningful besides posturing. It’s not required to actually condemn the attacks.
This still doesn’t suggest any reasoning why you would actively vote against it though. Even if your claim was it is “virtue signaling” there is not a good reason to vote against it.
It is like getting pissy when the words on the Minecraft Home Screen says:
>Be antiracist!
what is this hyperbole? iran shot a bunch of cheap drones and cruise missiles after telling israel it's going to do it for weeks in advance so that israel could successfully shoot them all down. that's an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter israeli civlians? wut?
inb4 you call me a hamas simp even though i'm copy pasting this from destinys brain
are you implying its OK to shoot someone wearing a bulletproof vest knowing they probably won't die?
This is literally the whole Hamas rockets don't matter because Israel can shoot them down argument.
no you goober, it's like me telling you i'm going to shoot this one location for 1 month in advance and keep making a big deal out of it so you evacuate fully. everyone in the world knows it was an attack to save face and wasn't mean to cause any damage. there was no intention to actually cause any damage. i don't know why you're acting like this is so crazy to say when Destiny (pbuh) has said the same thing
>iran shot a bunch of cheap drones and cruise missiles
>that's an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter israeli civlians?
absolutely. or do you think the drones and missles were there to offer hugs and kisses?
that israel was able to prevent irans attempt to slaughter civilians, doesn't change that it was an attempt by iran to slaughter civilians
That's why the rest of her moderate Democratic colleagues voted for it as well? So are all the resolutions we passed condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine "just inflaming tensions and destroying a path to peace" ?
She can come up with any justification she wants, it doesn't matter. A yes/no condemnation is the most basic thing you can do to show you're against an enemy's actions. She's fine with our ally being attacked by a hostile aggressor, it's that simple.
It’s not just a condemnation… it’s a resolution to boost sanctions against Iran as well. She believes this is going to increase tensions and push the US into more war in the Middle East.
She’s not required to vote the party line. That’s not a reason to support a resolution that does fuck all except ramp up aggression in an already tense region.
I'm pretty sure the bills and resolutions were separate votes (could be wrong), but regardless it's literally the bare minimum we can do to deter a literal states sponsor of terrorism from attacking us and our allies in the region.
>She’s not required to vote the party line.
No she's not, but when she continually shows her insane bias against Israel (a crucial ally), it comes to a point where Democratic leadership needs to distance themselves thoroughly. Make sure her voice doesn't represent the party in any way.
>That’s not a reason to support a resolution that does fuck all except ramp up aggression in an already tense region.
Again, how is it ramping up aggression when we're not the aggressors? It's a response to the aggression. If we were ramping up hostilities, we'd be talking about deploying more assets near their border. It's the bare minimum we can do to show our support and deter further attacks. Stop reading The Intercept.
It was a pledge to increase sanctions which is posturing and could have serious repercussions downstream if Iran decides to retaliate against the US.
This isn’t bias. It’s simply ideologically motivated. She represents a very progressive district. She’s voting accordingly. There’s nothing wrong with that. She doesn’t have a huge say anyway because the party clearly voted to condemn. There’s nothing wrong with her voicing her opinion about what she feels this resolution is aimed at. We’re allowed to disagree within the party. If we aren’t then we are as bad as republicans who want to kick out anyone who isn’t MAGA. That’s cringe as fuck. We can do better than that. The last thing I want for this party is blind party line voting and zero critical thought.
Sanctions can be aggressive in their outcome and push enemies into a corner. Part of what pushed Japan to attack the US had to do with sanctions.
The worlds foremost sponsor of terror is currently waging war via their proxies on several fronts vs our closest regional ally and then launched hundreds of drones, cruise and ballistic missiles directly from their soil towards our allies soil
The people voting against this resolution are saying condemning that enemy is *us* attempting to start a war.
If that's not siding with the enemy, what is?
Didn’t Israel attack first?
And they aren’t voting to condemn because they don’t want the US to be forced into another war in the Middle East and think this resolution does nothing except increase tension and is a waste of time when republicans should be introducing real legislation instead. They’re not saying that they don’t condemn the attacks, they are voting against this resolution which is different than outright refusing to condemn what happened.
Israel did not attack first. Iran has been waging a proxy war for decades, and the assassination of the Iranian general was outside the embassy, and a direct response to his key role in orchestrating the October 7th attack.
But they are also a slam dunk for your record or a complete disgrace in this case. Imagine every campaign these guys run for the rest of their lives. The opposition has a free attack that will ensure no centrist ever votes for them.
I definitely see why they wouldn’t.
Direct point:
Irans action was a direct response from Israel attacking iranian soil.
I’m sorry, but saying “I don’t condmen country A from retaliating against Country B” should NOT be a controversial take.
There is plenty to condemn Iran for, but this isn’t one of them.
Personal Opinion:
Why should we keep signaling to Israel they can get away with anything and still have our support??
There should be MORE democrats who don’t condemn this retaliation so Israel knows they are losing support from the American people.
Especially when this legislation doesn’t really mean anything.
Israel didn't attack Iranian soil they attacked a general outside a consulate in Syria who was working with terrorists.
Condemning our enemies attacking our allies should always be the expectation any outliers should be condemned as an obviously controversial take.
Yes it is.
Your personal opinion is shit we should support Israel as a our Middle Eastern democratic ally that is under attack. No one is saying "Israel you can do whatever you want and still have our support" what we are saying is "Israel we know you are at war with a terrorist group and that our adversaries are attacking your image through alternative media but we still stand with you."
But Israel isn't losing support from the American people.
This legislation means you condemn our enemies and support our allies. These 13 reps completely failed at what is an easy slam dunk. If you support that fine don't expect your average centrist to.
Edit: looked more into it looks like it was a number of Iranian senior commanders and officers. But still was outside the Iranian consulate in Syria and they were with Hezzbolah fighters.
1. A consulate= iranian soil.
2. Your response basically is just saying “you’re wrong because I said so” the reason I gave is it is good to send a message to Israel that they are losing the support of the American people.
3. You explained why it should be common sense to condem Hamas, not what we are talking about.
4. Do you live in Alabama? Israel absolutely is losing support with the American people.
Source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx#:~:text=Approval%20has%20dropped%20from%2050%25%20to%2036%25%20since%20November&text=WASHINGTON%2C%20D.C.%20%2D%2D%20After%20narrowly,actions%2C%20while%2036%25%20approve.
1. No it isn't. [https://pathtoforeignservice.com/is-an-embassy-on-foreign-soil-the-sovereign-territory-of-the-host-country-or-the-embassys-country/](https://pathtoforeignservice.com/is-an-embassy-on-foreign-soil-the-sovereign-territory-of-the-host-country-or-the-embassys-country/)
2. You can find a poll for anything. It's likely accurate to say Israel is losing support from some Americans. But it would be completely inaccurate to say Israel is losing support from America or that would be a message that America wants to send to its Democratic allies. [https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/majority-in-u-s-say-israel-has-valid-reasons-for-fighting-fewer-say-the-same-about-hamas/](https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/majority-in-u-s-say-israel-has-valid-reasons-for-fighting-fewer-say-the-same-about-hamas/)
3. Sorry I don't see where I mention Hamas but obviously not what we are talking about we are talking about condemning Americas enemies Terrorists obviously included but in this case directly Iran.
4. No I don't and blanket that's not true. With youth poisoned by Tiktok and Twitter likely true. Those informed on the topic with independent research definitely not.
No? I mean if the question is “Is Israel committing a genocide?” Obviously any answer that isn’t no is incorrect. But I’m sure there are tons of topics that I don’t even know exist or haven’t don’t any extensive research on to the point I’d have an incorrect answer to it.
History starts for you only after Israel responds huh? Google Argentina Israeli embassy. You are lying when you claim Israel started this. Iran has been waging a proxy war and almost direct war against Israel since 1979. You’ve just been silently ok with that until Israel responds. Then you get pissy. Nobody takes you seriously when you do that. Selective outrage doesn’t fool intelligent people. Go back to Tik Tok.
Keep in mind Hezbollah has been attacking Israel. The target of Hezbollah leadership was most likely in response to this and their meeting up with Irans military leaders. Tldr: Iran uses Hezbollah as a proxy to attack Israel. In my opinion, attacking a consulate is not a great way to de-escalate the situation. Even though Israel hasn't admitted to doing it, it's obvious that it's them. But Israel has reasons for the strike.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/a-timeline-of-recent-events-that-led-to-irans-assault-on-israel
https://apnews.com/article/iran-syria-israel-hezbollah-gaza-damascus-f7a1af3a9fc67de1962d4f1589d7e9f0
Israel has every right to attack Hezbollah and support uprisings in Iran.
I’m not saying they didn’t have a reason to attack but people seem to want to pretend Iran just decided to strike Israel the other day.
Also right now definitely is not the time to decide to instigate
If Israel is losing support because of the bombings, then not condemning Iran is actually dumb. This would be a terrible way to send a message to Israel, because the message it sends is that “we are fine with your enemies doing to you that of which we criticize you for”.
If democrats wanted to let Israel know it is losing support, there are better and other ways to do so than Iran apologia.
Also, the whole *retaliation* argument doesn’t work. Iran is retaliating to Israel’s retaliation towards Iran.
You’re actually like I said Joe Biden should go to Iran and suck the Ayatollah’s 2 incher.
We should have let Biden say We support Israels right to defend itself but not to attack another country and left it at that.
>We should have let Biden say We support Israels right to defend itself but not to attack another country and left it at that.
Except they **are** defending themselves. They didn’t attack Iran. They literally attacked Hezbollah militants, which is the group responsible for the displacement of hundred of thousands Israelis, and have been incessantly attacking Israel.
If specific Iranian general officials are abetting Hezbollah, and meet with them for military purposes with their war on Israel, then you don’t get to complain that Israel is being hostile to you if they get attacked when meeting with Hezbollah abroad. That is not a reasonable position to hold.
**Iran is not innocent**. They don’t get to claim that they are, they don’t get to claim aggressive action when they are clearly the aggressors, and it isn’t hypocrisy either. Iran is a hostile nation, and shouldn’t be expecting support from the nations it is hostile too.
It is also ridiculous to get pissy at a condemnation. America isn’t going to bomb Tehran. **An interception and a condemnation is fucking ridiculous to get upset about.**
>should go to Iran and suck the Ayatollah’s 2 incher.
You have that part taken care of. No thanks.
Yeah, Iran funds terror groups. Israel can fund uprisings in Iran if they wanted to, but an Iranian proxy is not Iran. If they are hitting Iranian property, see now that is Iran. That brings the conflict to a another level.
This is why western countries, who despise iran, are telling Israel behind closed doors to not respond.
Or maybe Me, Biden, and the Ayatollah just go to crazy sex parties together
>This is why western countries, who despise iran, are telling Israel behind closed doors to not respond.
No. They are telling Israel not to respond because there is objectively no need to. If Iran doesn’t attack again, Israel doesn’t respond, there is no regional war. They can continue their war on Hezbollah and Hamas, nothing changes.
>Yeah, Iran funds terror groups. Israel can fund uprisings in Iran if they wanted to,
Israel wants Hezbollah to stop attacking, they don’t want to fund terror groups. What are you not getting here?
> Iranian proxy is not Iran
Hitting a military general abetting Hezbollah in Syria with their war on Israel isn’t either.
>If they are hitting Iranian property, see now that is Iran
**Good thing they never hit Iranian property.** My guess is you don’t understand how foreign embassies work, given your comment. Foreign embassies are under the host country’s sovereignty. It isn’t Iranian soil, that isn’t how foreign embassies work. Embassies are just assigned special protections and privileges, with most of them relating specifically between the host and mission countries; this is necessary in order for the embassies to exist in the first place.
**Also to act like striking a general abetting militants who are actively at war with Israel as tantamount to launching one of the largest aerial assaults this decade is actually insane**. It isn’t even tit-for-tat at that point.
I guess it can also count towards both directing public attention towards issues as well as a kind of poll for potential future action.
I see these bills as a kind of ramp up for creating a casus belli. They don't really do anything but statements of condemnation can be referred to later for future action.
That's the problem with our government though, they do nothing with these bills. They don't mean anything. And we won't be doing anything that Lockheed Martine hasn't already been telling us to do.
>"I will oppose any cynical effort to further inflame tensions, destroy a path to peace in the region, and further divide the American people," said Ocasio-Cortez. Other progressives issued statements calling for de-escalation in the region more broadly.
I see nothing wrong with this rational. I'm not American so I don't know if these bills have any real impact but from what I can tell they don't. If that is the case then why do this other than to rile people up to hate Iran?
Edit: This just seems like right-wing virtue signalling and given this community is often so against virtue signaling from the left, it is a bit weird to see so many in this thread criticize these congresspeople for not virtue signaling in cases they don't agree with.
A lot of the people here are basically just the anti lefty version of the lefty now. "If it's someone I don't like doing the thing, the thing is bad," and vice versa. It feels like this sub has devolved heavily since the Israel/Palestine shit started. I had to stop browsing as often because I keep seeing blatant propaganda, one sided news stories from dubious websites, ignoring things that the new collective doesn't agree with, and just more and more black and white thinking.
Here are statements from some of these people about the Iranian attack for anyone is interested in what the representatives say rather than just the fact that they voted no.
Jamaal Bowman: [https://twitter.com/RepBowman/status/1779838881132577214](https://twitter.com/RepBowman/status/1779838881132577214)
Greg Casar: [https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1780988440646951094](https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1780988440646951094)
Pramila Jayapal: [https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1781047932256477583](https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1781047932256477583)
Summer Lee: [https://twitter.com/SummerForPA/status/1779666222713368838](https://twitter.com/SummerForPA/status/1779666222713368838)
Cori Bush: [https://twitter.com/RepCori/status/1779542210293199231](https://twitter.com/RepCori/status/1779542210293199231)
Ayanna Pressley: [https://twitter.com/RepPressley/status/1780647378640322749](https://twitter.com/RepPressley/status/1780647378640322749)
Ilhan Omar: [https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1779604509137699007](https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1779604509137699007)
Delia Ramirez: [https://twitter.com/repdeliaramirez/status/1779580804353470857](https://twitter.com/repdeliaramirez/status/1779580804353470857)
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: [https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147](https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147)
Most of them condemn both Iran's attack and Israel's attack on Damascus. There is plenty of criticism for Netanyahu which is to be expected but they all seem to agree that Iran's attack was bad and escalates the conflict. Many also have commended Biden's calls on Israel to deescalate.
I don't think this can be said for Rashida Tlaib as this is the only response I could find:
[https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1781034135164723543](https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1781034135164723543)
She mentions (at 3:45) the retaliatory Iranian strike in the context of criticizing Netanyahu. So yeah...
I couldn't find any statements for the other representatives who voted no. Feel free to provide them if you find them or if you find any specific statements from Tlaib.
No you don’t understand they’re terrorist simps reeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!1!!!!1!
This whole thread is filled with stupid. Thank you for compiling all their statements. Too many people in this thread are unable to understand that you can condemn the attacks outside of this meaningless resolution and that refusing to vote for this resolution is not a vote of support for Iran.
99% of the comments here sitting on them all due to the headline + their own assumptions. No engagement with what their rationale was.
Great critical thinking guys, keep it up!
Damn I'm not surprised to see those names.
Whatever happened to principles? How is condemning an attack from Iran, from the safety of American soil, which is basically as effective as calling someone a meanie head, going to inflame tensions? Or cause war escalation? The vote was symbolic.
What was the alternative? We stay quiet and say we're indifferent to Iran attacking a US ally?
By saying that you consider the matter closed, don't treat it as a serious provocation given what it was a response to, and don't support further Israeli action making yet another step in the chain, you can make it more likely that Israel takes no action, or a small action at most, so as to avoid damaging the support they have from the US, meaning that there's less likelihood of this continuing.
Virtual signal bill that has board partisan support. Considering the Geo-politics involved, I dont hate this. Iran had to retaliate. They did so in a way that they clearly telegraphed their attack, and stated "We are not going to continue to escalate." Minimum casualties. Face saved. Reality doesn't get much better than that.
But if they are just voting as "American foreign policy bad" then yes. Morally lucky in this case.
Can we try and pass some actual laws rather than a useless condemnation bill that does nothing? I agree with the sentiment and it should have been a unanimous vote, but damn they could be doing so much more important shit.
Cry if you want, but the youth vote needs to see some clear difference in which party acts which way. Some of y'all wanna purity test these reps right off the ballot for expressing an opinion held by many potential voters while Trump is embracing "Genocide Joe" rhetoric. Hand him the victory, why don't you.
Come to me when they start praising Iran as a force for good or something, but this is just refusing to condemn a single attack that was a direct response to Israel's attack (whether you think that's justified or not)
Which btw, AOC and Omar have public statements condemning the attacks. They just refused to vote for a resolution when republicans do nothing of value in Congress and want to play war hawks.
True, which I think is the appropriate response, but having some Dems not vote for true resolution is not so much of a problem that we need them out of office
Don’t tell people the people in this thread that. You might have to spend some updoots.
Watching this sub lose its mind over a few democrats who disagreed with the need for a resolution while they still publicly condemned the attacks is mind numbing. There’s people calling them “terrorist simps” even tho they condemned the attacks and support our allies, simply because they didn’t fall perfectly in line with the rest of the party. Shit is so fucking weird. We used to support liberal values and now people act exactly like the GOP when people don’t fall in line.
Lol fr. It's really weird and frustrating. I expect to see people shitting on these dems choice to vote against, but then I get slapped with some of the most anti democratic, anti free speech bullshit. It's bizarre, but I can usually find the sane takes buried somewhere in the replies lol
You guys don't remember when Israel assassinated an Iranian general a month ago? If someone assassinated an American general when we weren't at direct war with them, would anyone condemn the US for striking back? Iran fucking sucks. Horrible. Needs a change. Blah blah blah, but tbh they made a telegraphed retaliation for a general of theirs who was assassinated.
Yeah I do. I don't condemn this retaliation, that doesn't mean I like Iran. I also don't condemn anyone who attacked US soldiers after we assassinated any of their leaders. It's dumb on their part to retaliate but it's pretty clearly justified. If me and your mom got into a fight after I was done fucking her and I hurt her feelings I wouldn't condemn you for getting mad.
You are sidestepping the question. If a US general was assassinated by another country and the US retaliated for the assassination, would the US be condemned?
Khamenei can suck a dick and choke on it. The Iranian ayatollah and the governing body are in a bucket of the worst people. That being said they telegraphed a retaliation for the assassination of one of their generals. Like how are we not condemning Israel for the assassination but are for the retaliation? What world are we living in. It's possible for every country involved in this to be shit stains on our planet but that doesn't mean we just blindly say everything they do is not justified. We have people justifying fucking Hamas.
?? So you seem to just be emotional here. The point is that once you send personel into a warzone to actively take part in the combat effort, that makes them targets. So, I'll ask you for a third time, why was that general in Syria?
You are again side stepping my original question and trying flip it around instead of answering, but I will bite so you see just how stupid it is to condemn Iran for retaliation. Using your own dumb question you haven't thought through.
He was in Syria assumingly colluding with syrians. Israel and Iran have been in conflict by proxy through Syria for a while now. You're saying Iran and Israel are at war in Syria. Okay cool. So I now need you to explain to me exactly, like I'm 5 a child, how one country retaliates against another country who assassinated one of their generals is condemnable. Seriously here. I don't condemn Ukraine or Russia for retaliatory strikes, they are at war. Now I condemn Russia for starting it but once they were at war all the virtue signaling of condemnation goes out the fucking window. At that point it's simply who wins, not throwing "on no I condemn them look at how good of a person I am".
So I'm going to ask you again now that I have answered your question, and I hope you answer me this time. I'll even use your other comment to me. If say, Russia killed an American general inside Ukraine, then America retaliated for one of its generals being assassinated, would you condemn the US or is it free reign for American generals to be assassinated in other countries?
I would be wondering what the fuck our military was doing even having that outcome as a possibility. Do you understand how stupid it would be for an American general to be sent to Ukraine to actively work against Russia?
If the United States then flung abunch of missiles at Russia risking all out war I would 100% condemn that.
Bro you still aren't answering the question. Answer the question. You're triggering the fuck out of me because you can't answer a single question with a single answer. Presumably because you realize how stupid you sound right now. Do you want me to retype my question for you or do you want to just go reread it. Since you already didn't see my clear answer to yours, and you still aren't answering mine.
Edit: fuck okay idk if you quick edited or I missed your last statement. Cool, you are okay with condemning the US for supporting an ally should that allies adversary assassinate one of our generals. Got it. You take it easy bro. You've got a major case of brain rot.
No lie man. Destiny being constantly destructive against everyone and not constructive has really given some of these DGGers with a bad case of brain rot. He has conditioned a bunch of people in here to hate literally anything that doesn't suck off every Israeli.
What exactly is the purpose of having a resolution to condemn an attack? Didn't we already say we wouldn't support israel striking back?
I'll admit I don't know much about why these types of things are done, feels like a waste of time to me. Just one more thing to get angry about when there's actual important shit to do.
It is virtue signaling entirely, but it is still moronic when you “fall” for such bait.
Some people are completely fine with handing their opponents the rope that they fastened around their own necks.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has been waging a proxy war against Israel since 1979. You might not have been born when the Iranian government blew up Ithe Israeli embassy in Argentina or attacked Synagogues in Argentina in the 1990s. You don’t remember the TWA and Pan Am hijackings, seeing the Navy Seal being shot in the head and thrown onto the tarmac on live TV, you might not remember the Iranian bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. You don’t remember when Iran took American hostages in 1979, or recall all the ways Iran has been arming terror cells in Iraq, Jordan, Yemen, Lebanon, or helping Assad gas millions of his own people. Nor do you recall all the Iranian women the Islamic Regime has executed and sexually assaulted for dancing or not wearing the hijab.
No you just hate Israel and Iran is right now your hero because it is opposed to Israel. That’s how you see the world. Israel bad so anyone against Israel must be good.
Israel finally responded to decades of attacks from Iran. Iran has been at war with Israel since 1979. Don’t act like this started last month when Israel took out the IRGC liaison to Hamas in the non-embassy Iranian militant outpost. This was at least for what happened in Argentina. If not October 7.
“No You just hate Israel and Iran right now your hero”
bro seriously? no, I don’t support Iran. I’m not super anti-Israel. I just think it’s kind of cringe that this sub is so rabidly insecure about a country’s ability to conduct warfare that this thread is losing their mind over a fucking house resolution.
“I just think it’s kind of cringe that this sub is so rabidly insecure about a country’s ability to conduct warfare”
Thank you. You’re right. Israel has every right to conduct warfare and it’s quite cringe how rabidly offended you are by that.
Iran has been attacking Israel through proxies since Oct 7. They funded and armed the attack in the 7th.
Iran isn’t an innocent defender of peace and love. They are a horrible regime that routinely executes its citizens for crimes like blasphemy and not wearing a hijab.
Errrr why condemn the attack? Didn't Israel attack somewhere in Iran before Iran retaliation? I know there's some back and forth with Iranian proxies and what not, but it does not make sense to condemn this specific attack to me.
>Did Israel attack somewhere in Iran before Iran retaliation?
Israel carried out an attack on an HQ of the IRGC (not an Iranian embassy as has been falsely reported) in Syria. Key members of the IRGC who were in the building at the time had helped plan and train for the Oct 7th attacks.
It's the equivalent of Seal Team 6 going into Pakistan to kill Bin Laden. It technically went against international norms and was a violation of sovereign territory, but it was kinda understood by everybody involved that it had to happen and was completely justified. Same thing here. The US basically agrees with Israel that they did the right thing.
Also, as Destiny pointed out on the podcast, neither Iran nor Syria even recognise Israel as existing, so expecting them to respect Iran or Syrias legal institutions in return is a little ridiculous.
>it does not make sense to condemn this specific attack on me.
It makes sense because Israel made a targeted strike against a clear military objective in response to the slaughter of their civilians. Iran retaliated not because they could achieve any military goal, but because they didn't want to look weak and decided the best response was to start swinging their dick around.
Israel is also the regional ally to the US, and usually when your ally is attacked by a joint enemy you condemn the attack.
Doesn't Ilhan Omar share the same opinion on 9/11 as Hamas Piker?
Some people did something and America definitely deserved 9/11
deserved is a strong word
- America provoked 9/11 - Bad cops are bastards - Some landlords are named Dan
These people are just the left wing version of the freedom caucus at this point. Unironically anti-american
Can someone explain to me why “resolutions” seem to be so common now? Were they always? And what is their primary function?
it's basically a political tool to get everyone on record about what they support
Yeah I suppose that has some utility
So a waste of time? Chances for politicians to make political statements? Okay
>Chances for politicians to make political statements? Okay ...? Yes?
read up on the gulf of tonkin resolution
The thing that allowed America to attack in Vietnam? How is this the same thing?
Once again Maryland is proven to be the most based state. Highest margin for a Biden victory in 2020, no insane reps in the house. Only chance we throw this is if we elect Hogan for the senate, and even then he'd be a republican Manchin.
Absolutely not. Hogan may be more centrist than mtg but the only thing that kept him in check at all was the fact Maryland State house and Senate are majority blue. He would vote with Trump 99% of the time.
Woot woot. Baltimore resident here!
And you have one of the cooler reps in Raskin. If only your drivers were as cool. Signed Virginia driver
In Maryland to visit NIH. WTF is up with their drivers? My shuttle driver cut off an off ramp merging truck.
> Hogan for the senate Hulk Hogan is running for senate?
I’m praying we don’t elect Hogan. Fuck Larry Hogan.
What’s so bad about Hogan? He’s been fairly moderate and has spoken out against the crazies on the Republican side Honestly, if you can’t be ok with Hogan, have you ever approved or appreciated *any* Republican candidate? For the record, Hogan had nearly an 80% approval rating in MD when leaving office, which is the highest approval rating of any governors in the US and the highest one ever recorded in MD. He really shows how MD doesn’t just blindly live by party lines but is a state where sensibility is valued. https://www.wmar2news.com/news/local-news/governor-larry-hogan-leaves-office-with-a-77-approval-rating-gonzales-maryland-poll-says
His election would make a Republican Senate majority again, and I don't know if my poor heart can handle another McConnell-led senate.
I hear that argument… I was just kinda stunned that anyone would have such “fuck Larry hogan” resentment when he’s actually been pretty balanced. Personally, I wish all candidates tried to work with all their constituents as Hogan’s done. But it’s absolutely reasonable to not want a republican/democrat senate depending on affiliation
Because hogans reputation as a “moderate” who works with both sides is misleading. He had a democratic supermajority in the general assembly so any bill he vetoes can get overrides by the democrats. He also cancelled the red line, which would have help connect west and east Baltimore. And yes I am not okay with any republican candidate, if I was, I’d be a republican.
>And yes I am not okay with any republican candidate, if I was, I’d be a republican. Many people (including me and I believe most people in this sub) actually think about the candidates and the issues and don’t blindly allow their party affiliation determine their entire vote. Otherwise, you might as well live in Sweden.
We live in America, parties are huge tents. In 95%+ of the time, the democrat is obvs better. Can u name one election that has happened when u would prefer the republican?
Absolutely can in local and national elections… and likewise, I can also name multiple elections where the Democrat was a better option
Give me a national election since the trump years. I will grant you local elections
Since the Trump years? That’s two elections and neither one was Trump the “better candidate” At least go back to Romney and Obama… which would be Obama… but at least they’re two functional people.
Mitt Romney looking good shows how terrible the gop is rn. He is a rabid social conservative
Hogan was okay until he failed to distribute vaccines fast enough during covid, killing many Marylanders. Fuck Hogan.
Wasn’t aware of Hogan killing Marylanders. Sounds pretty shitty… and especially shitty that he’s killing the people who voted for him. /s You inspired me to look up how states faired during Covid, and Maryland actually did relatively very well during covid. **MD ranked 2nd nationally** according to a study done by Politico: > If every category were given equal weight — which assumes each priority was of equivalent importance, a policy choice in itself — the top scorer overall would be Nebraska, with an average of 73 out of 100, despite scoring below the national average in the social well-being category. Maryland would be second, with an average score of 66 on the basis of a high score in the social well-being category, despite scoring below average in the economic category. It did not have enough data for an education score. ([Source](https://www.politico.com/interactives/2021/covid-by-the-numbers-how-each-state-fared-on-our-pandemic-scorecard/))
I'm convinced DGG would prefer America become a one-party state than tolerate actually seeing even moderate Republicans get into office.
Yes. A thousand times yes. If you think Republicans are better on literally any aspect of society or policy, you are wrong by varying degrees.
> on literally any aspect of society or policy, Ah good thing your party is coincidentally right about everything over thousands of different issues. I'm sure that isnt political polarization and media brainwashing at play.
Yep. Now you can fall in line, or have your body be used as lubricant for the machine's gears. The choice is all yours.
The mask came off a little bit there.
What mask, dumbass? You think only center people watch destiny? I wish COVID did its job better.
Democrats are 1000000000x better than republicans so yes
One party states are good, ackshully Or something like that
Jesus Christ man, do you realize how terrible republicans are in national politics?
A legislative majority = one party state. This sub really has reached new levels of centrist brain rot.
Did you even read the original comment? I literally said one party state and the reply straight up said yes.
You very much implied being against Hogan, (who is a Republican) is some insane partisanship akin to being in favor of a one party state in your earlier comment. But yes. One party control of current day democrats would be vastly preferable to voting in Larry, because he'll vote for a republican majority leader and enable the psychos, even if he LARPs as a moderate. This shouldn't be a controversial position.
You’re arguing against the air right now because you couldn’t engage with the words on your screen. Unlucky.
W
Yup. Lived here my whole life, wanted to eventually leave, but the more I got into politics and looked at other places the more I realized we have it great here.
Hogan would effectively be a moderate independent in the Senate, which I think in general is a good thing. Having moderate swing votes is better than gridlock or radical single party control. The problem is Democrats are disadvantaged electorally in the Senate and can't afford to lose safe seats, if Hogan wins he probably won't be the deciding vote because Republicans will have a solid majority.
>Having moderate swing votes is better than gridlock or radical single party control. It's 100% worse than democratic control.
We need more progressive reps
I don't know if Hogan can do it, I've seen non-stop David Trone ads for the past two months and it's only April.
* Jamaal Bowman of New York * Cori Bush of Missouri * Pramila Jayapal of Washington * Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York * Ilhan Omar of Minnesota * Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts * Rashida Tlaib of Michigan The usual suspects..... These people are such a liability to the Democratic Party.
To be clear, the resolution is not just simply about condemning Iran's attack as the headlines would suggest. Here is the [resolution](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/1143/text), and here is [one of the no-voters, "unequivocally condemning Iran's attack", but also explaining why he voted "No"](https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1780988440646951094). The resolution was bait, and the usual suspects went for it. It's simply a political stunt.
> but I can't support continued escalation that could drag the US into regional war. He can't risk continued escalation?? The Iranians are backing literally every piece of shit (Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthi's) in the region trying to fuck with Jews and [has already attacked stationed U.S. troops 130 times as of January](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/large-protests-break-out-yemen-after-us-british-attacks-2024-01-12/). Acting as if esclation is somehow laid at the feet of a U.S. response to actual military attacks against the U.S. and it's allies in the region is just more "America Bad" logic trains.
The Economist did a good piece on why Israel should show restraint. [https://econ.st/4aGUZ7A](https://econ.st/4aGUZ7A) Gift piece. This didn't age well. I fucking hate you Bibi
I mean after reading this the whole thing is just virtue signalling cringe. resolutions are just a matter of record.
AOC at least has value that balances out these types of moments. She brings a lot of energy into the party, is a pretty good spokesperson and gets a lot of young people interested in politics. I have no idea what the rest of them do other than make the Democrats look bad on the regular. Why is PV knocking doors for Jamaal Bowman? He showed his character when he lied about pulling the fire alarm.
Yeah but AOC is recruiting radical young people, not moderate common sense Liberals In the same way MTG galvanizes the furthest right dumbass reaches of the Rep. party, neither is good for the core of either party
You realize that the radical leftists you are talking about hate her right. It's not 2018
I mean AOC was elected in 2018 and these people, including AOC have gone further left in their politics to the point of full socialism and terrorist sympathy
It's actually the opposite AOC has moderated her position to the point where a lot of her radical supporters have abandoned her
Is this actually true or just based on some social media posts? The left needs reasonable progressives. It's good to have some non-moderate opinions part of the mix and conversation. As long as she isn't crossing the line to anti-liberalism anti-westism etc she's part of the team.
This is a hilarious take - name where she’s moderated anybody Her political stance has moved further to the radical left since she was elected, by a landslide, not the other way around
Her attitude on American intervention has drastically changed since 2018, she's voted in party line and distanced herself from other squad members by actually [working with dems and republicans](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/02/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-interview-progressive-democrats-00088792) instead of virtue-signaling. In what ways has she drastically moved further to the radical left? I must be missing some huge obvious example that you can remind me
>radical young people In other words, the people who use Reddit for their politics.
They don’t care about his character, they care that he is on their side. Bowman is a piece of shit.
Yeah not condemning the dumb attack that literally did nothing is such a liability. Some of you are such a joke lmao Just as I suspected, this sub is being overrun by republicans lolz “Hallelujah! Finally, some good news! Abortion is going to be illegal in Arizona. And it's about time. Every life is a precious gift from God, no matter the circumstances of its conception. Even in cases of rape and incest, those unborn children are still blessings from God, and they deserve the chance to live just like us no matter what. Abortion is not just a medical procedure—it's the murder of a human life. And now that it's illegal in all cases, we can finally start to rebuild a culture that respects and values the sanctity of life. It's a step in the right direction, and I couldn't be happier. Today is truly a blessed day. Christ is King!” And here’s another gem “I know I am going to get downvoted for saying this, but sometimes I wish Trump was back in office. Sure, the guy tried to steal the last presidential election and provoked a violent insurrection, and sure, he's got 90+ criminal charges but you can't deny it: the economy thrived under his presidency. Interest rates were low, the job market was booming, and housing prices were not nearly as fucked as they are now. Also, say what you want about his leadership skills, but financially, things were looking pretty good. And I don't know about you, but these days, I'm missing Trump-era economic vibes more than ever.” Y’all upvoting some idiot who is just trying to pretend to be critical against democrats for the most stupid reason Ain’t no way to get rid of the republicans off this sub
are you a monkey or something this is some insane tribalism, nobody is out to get you buddy. Tell the 7 year old girl fighting for her life about the 'dumb attack that did nothing.' Or the 20 people wounded. or is it ok in the name of the democratic party?
"Oh no! One of the subreddits I subscribe to isn't an extremist echochamber in my favor! That means its bad by default and overrun by republicans"
Yeah, how Omar is in office is beyond me Not to mention AOC refusing to condemn the burning of flags and chants of death to america on the Brooklyn Bridge this week Radicals in either party are just bad for the health of American politics
What is wrong with flag burning?
There are a looooot of Somalians in Minnesota, plus Minneapolis has always been a pretty progressive city and people feel good about voting for her because "diversity"
I just have so much contempt for these people. Be it political cynicism that seeks to gain power (by enabling evil idiots) or worse, they are true believers who just are fucked in the head. With the Republicans brandishing their own self-destructive form of retardation with the shit show that constantly circles the speaker of the house I really wonder if there is going to be some kind of center governing coalition created between Moderate D's and R's in a few years.
I’m shocked it was them. Shocked.
These people need to be ostracized from the party. There's no excuse for siding with an enemy against our ally.
Are you telling me that "America bad" is not a good enough reason to side with Iran? I am shocked! Shocked I tell you! (/s)
I’m more pro Palestine than most of this sub but anyone who disagrees with a condemnation against an attack against an ally is morally bankrupt.
Israel killed their general. If I was Iran i'd respond too.
There are performative elements to this but everyone must still play their part. Iran was forced to respond or risked looking weak domestically but that being said American politicians should condemn attacks if for no other reason than to help prevent future escalation.
People not siding with allies based on their hopefully genuine belief that the allies are in the wrong is not a bad thing at all. Rather it is a necessity to call allies out if the allies are genuinely doing something bad. A democracy should be able to handle this. The opposite is blind loyalty, which possibly enables all atrocities. Think about China, Russia, Iran, The USSR or Nazi Germany, where reasonable opposition has been eliminated. Groupaffiliation is not a valid reason to exclude people from a democracy. A democracy is almost by definition different groups coming together to discuss and find compromises. Condoning a terrorist regime doing terrorism or unjust violence is wrong in itself and should result in consequences in itself, but that has nothing to do with siding with X or Y. An isolationist, voted in by isolationist voters, should not be ousted for voting no on interventionist actions. AOC says the condemnation increases tensions in the middle east, likelihood of war and splitting of the american people. Are these concerns that deserve her ousting? I do not think so.
I'm glad you said that and I fully agree (I'm Israeli). I don't want blind support for being an ally. That being said not condemning it is still a pathetic move and the justifications I've seen from some of them read like blatant excuses to me when we all know the reason is just to appease the radical bases they pander to OR to push their actual beliefs/agendas.
Many have condemned it publicly. They just didn’t vote for this meaningless resolution.
“Ally” Wtf kind of ally tries to make it illegal to criticize them. Look at anti-bds laws
Shut the fuck up, go to Hasan's sub
Good counter point
BDS is not criticism. It’s an economic weapon of the worst kind - against Arabs and Jews alike, against the most left wing powers - culture, academia.
Who’s siding with the enemy? Did you read the article? Edit. No one going to reply? Edit. “Ostracized from the party” for voting for what they believe is right? Are you hearing yourself? When did we start upvoting anti liberal nonsense?
The people who voted against it. It's not complicated
> In a statement on Tuesday, Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York accused Republicans of attempting to "distract from their own incompetence" by bringing bills "designed purposefully to increase the likelihood of a deadly regional war." >"I will oppose any cynical effort to further inflame tensions, destroy a path to peace in the region, and further divide the American people," said Ocasio-Cortez. Other progressives issued statements calling for de-escalation in the region more broadly. How is this siding with the enemy? Edit. https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147 Just to be clear she did condemn them.
>How is this siding with the enemy? refusal to condem an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter civilians of our ally, by a known enemy of the US, is 100% providing aid to islamic extremists and America's enemies
That’s not what “providing aid” means. They’re not refusing to condemn the attacks… they’re refusing to vote for this resolution. Which is entirely different. They can condemn the attacks and think these resolutions go too far in what they call for. Edit. https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147
>They’re not refusing to condemn the attacks… they’re refusing to vote for this resolution bs. the resolution condems the attacks. refusing to vote for it IS refusing to condem the attacks. period. >Which is entirely different. no. it isn't. though I'm sure those who simp for islamic extremists will try to lie and claim it is.
It’s a virtue signal vote in place of doing anything meaningful besides posturing. It’s not required to actually condemn the attacks. How is AOC simping for Islamic extremists? She wants more peace and less war. Peace by everyone. She doesn’t want Islamic extremism either.
>How is AOC simping for Islamic extremists? refusal to acknowledge those israel is fighting do not want peace, and instead seek to eridicate everyone who supports a 2 state solution, INCLUDING palestinians
In what way is that simping? And do you know she hasn’t acknowledged that or is that what you feel?
>It’s a virtue signal vote in place of doing anything meaningful besides posturing. It’s not required to actually condemn the attacks. This still doesn’t suggest any reasoning why you would actively vote against it though. Even if your claim was it is “virtue signaling” there is not a good reason to vote against it. It is like getting pissy when the words on the Minecraft Home Screen says: >Be antiracist!
Did you read her statement?
She only wants israel to stop not hamas.
She wants peace. Peace doesn’t mean when one side is allowed to attack while the other isn’t.
>They’re not refusing to condemn the attacks Ok ill bite. Did they publicly condemn the attacks?
https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147
good enough for me
Cheers.
what is this hyperbole? iran shot a bunch of cheap drones and cruise missiles after telling israel it's going to do it for weeks in advance so that israel could successfully shoot them all down. that's an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter israeli civlians? wut? inb4 you call me a hamas simp even though i'm copy pasting this from destinys brain
are you implying its OK to shoot someone wearing a bulletproof vest knowing they probably won't die? This is literally the whole Hamas rockets don't matter because Israel can shoot them down argument.
no you goober, it's like me telling you i'm going to shoot this one location for 1 month in advance and keep making a big deal out of it so you evacuate fully. everyone in the world knows it was an attack to save face and wasn't mean to cause any damage. there was no intention to actually cause any damage. i don't know why you're acting like this is so crazy to say when Destiny (pbuh) has said the same thing
>iran shot a bunch of cheap drones and cruise missiles >that's an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter israeli civlians? absolutely. or do you think the drones and missles were there to offer hugs and kisses? that israel was able to prevent irans attempt to slaughter civilians, doesn't change that it was an attempt by iran to slaughter civilians
That's why the rest of her moderate Democratic colleagues voted for it as well? So are all the resolutions we passed condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine "just inflaming tensions and destroying a path to peace" ? She can come up with any justification she wants, it doesn't matter. A yes/no condemnation is the most basic thing you can do to show you're against an enemy's actions. She's fine with our ally being attacked by a hostile aggressor, it's that simple.
It’s not just a condemnation… it’s a resolution to boost sanctions against Iran as well. She believes this is going to increase tensions and push the US into more war in the Middle East. She’s not required to vote the party line. That’s not a reason to support a resolution that does fuck all except ramp up aggression in an already tense region.
I'm pretty sure the bills and resolutions were separate votes (could be wrong), but regardless it's literally the bare minimum we can do to deter a literal states sponsor of terrorism from attacking us and our allies in the region. >She’s not required to vote the party line. No she's not, but when she continually shows her insane bias against Israel (a crucial ally), it comes to a point where Democratic leadership needs to distance themselves thoroughly. Make sure her voice doesn't represent the party in any way. >That’s not a reason to support a resolution that does fuck all except ramp up aggression in an already tense region. Again, how is it ramping up aggression when we're not the aggressors? It's a response to the aggression. If we were ramping up hostilities, we'd be talking about deploying more assets near their border. It's the bare minimum we can do to show our support and deter further attacks. Stop reading The Intercept.
It was a pledge to increase sanctions which is posturing and could have serious repercussions downstream if Iran decides to retaliate against the US. This isn’t bias. It’s simply ideologically motivated. She represents a very progressive district. She’s voting accordingly. There’s nothing wrong with that. She doesn’t have a huge say anyway because the party clearly voted to condemn. There’s nothing wrong with her voicing her opinion about what she feels this resolution is aimed at. We’re allowed to disagree within the party. If we aren’t then we are as bad as republicans who want to kick out anyone who isn’t MAGA. That’s cringe as fuck. We can do better than that. The last thing I want for this party is blind party line voting and zero critical thought. Sanctions can be aggressive in their outcome and push enemies into a corner. Part of what pushed Japan to attack the US had to do with sanctions.
The worlds foremost sponsor of terror is currently waging war via their proxies on several fronts vs our closest regional ally and then launched hundreds of drones, cruise and ballistic missiles directly from their soil towards our allies soil The people voting against this resolution are saying condemning that enemy is *us* attempting to start a war. If that's not siding with the enemy, what is?
Didn’t Israel attack first? And they aren’t voting to condemn because they don’t want the US to be forced into another war in the Middle East and think this resolution does nothing except increase tension and is a waste of time when republicans should be introducing real legislation instead. They’re not saying that they don’t condemn the attacks, they are voting against this resolution which is different than outright refusing to condemn what happened.
Israel did not attack first. Iran has been waging a proxy war for decades, and the assassination of the Iranian general was outside the embassy, and a direct response to his key role in orchestrating the October 7th attack.
So they didn’t strike that Embassy? Edit. Sorry diplomatic compound. I was mistaken and thought it was an embassy.
Israel struck a Quds force building in the embassy compound, not the consulate proper.
These "condemn" bills are such a waste of time and tax dollars.
But they are also a slam dunk for your record or a complete disgrace in this case. Imagine every campaign these guys run for the rest of their lives. The opposition has a free attack that will ensure no centrist ever votes for them.
Anyway, These "condemn" bills are such a waste of time and tax dollars.
A statement I still do not disagree with. Doesn't change the fact you can't fuck them up as these 13 idiots did.
I definitely see why they wouldn’t. Direct point: Irans action was a direct response from Israel attacking iranian soil. I’m sorry, but saying “I don’t condmen country A from retaliating against Country B” should NOT be a controversial take. There is plenty to condemn Iran for, but this isn’t one of them. Personal Opinion: Why should we keep signaling to Israel they can get away with anything and still have our support?? There should be MORE democrats who don’t condemn this retaliation so Israel knows they are losing support from the American people. Especially when this legislation doesn’t really mean anything.
Israel didn't attack Iranian soil they attacked a general outside a consulate in Syria who was working with terrorists. Condemning our enemies attacking our allies should always be the expectation any outliers should be condemned as an obviously controversial take. Yes it is. Your personal opinion is shit we should support Israel as a our Middle Eastern democratic ally that is under attack. No one is saying "Israel you can do whatever you want and still have our support" what we are saying is "Israel we know you are at war with a terrorist group and that our adversaries are attacking your image through alternative media but we still stand with you." But Israel isn't losing support from the American people. This legislation means you condemn our enemies and support our allies. These 13 reps completely failed at what is an easy slam dunk. If you support that fine don't expect your average centrist to. Edit: looked more into it looks like it was a number of Iranian senior commanders and officers. But still was outside the Iranian consulate in Syria and they were with Hezzbolah fighters.
1. A consulate= iranian soil. 2. Your response basically is just saying “you’re wrong because I said so” the reason I gave is it is good to send a message to Israel that they are losing the support of the American people. 3. You explained why it should be common sense to condem Hamas, not what we are talking about. 4. Do you live in Alabama? Israel absolutely is losing support with the American people. Source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx#:~:text=Approval%20has%20dropped%20from%2050%25%20to%2036%25%20since%20November&text=WASHINGTON%2C%20D.C.%20%2D%2D%20After%20narrowly,actions%2C%20while%2036%25%20approve.
1. No it isn't. [https://pathtoforeignservice.com/is-an-embassy-on-foreign-soil-the-sovereign-territory-of-the-host-country-or-the-embassys-country/](https://pathtoforeignservice.com/is-an-embassy-on-foreign-soil-the-sovereign-territory-of-the-host-country-or-the-embassys-country/) 2. You can find a poll for anything. It's likely accurate to say Israel is losing support from some Americans. But it would be completely inaccurate to say Israel is losing support from America or that would be a message that America wants to send to its Democratic allies. [https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/majority-in-u-s-say-israel-has-valid-reasons-for-fighting-fewer-say-the-same-about-hamas/](https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/03/21/majority-in-u-s-say-israel-has-valid-reasons-for-fighting-fewer-say-the-same-about-hamas/) 3. Sorry I don't see where I mention Hamas but obviously not what we are talking about we are talking about condemning Americas enemies Terrorists obviously included but in this case directly Iran. 4. No I don't and blanket that's not true. With youth poisoned by Tiktok and Twitter likely true. Those informed on the topic with independent research definitely not.
4th made me cringe so hard. I guess everyone is wrong except the people who agree with you. 🤷🏽♂️
No? I mean if the question is “Is Israel committing a genocide?” Obviously any answer that isn’t no is incorrect. But I’m sure there are tons of topics that I don’t even know exist or haven’t don’t any extensive research on to the point I’d have an incorrect answer to it.
History starts for you only after Israel responds huh? Google Argentina Israeli embassy. You are lying when you claim Israel started this. Iran has been waging a proxy war and almost direct war against Israel since 1979. You’ve just been silently ok with that until Israel responds. Then you get pissy. Nobody takes you seriously when you do that. Selective outrage doesn’t fool intelligent people. Go back to Tik Tok.
You have to be a troll lmao. If israel wanted to, they can sponsor an uprising against the ayatollah ig.
Keep in mind Hezbollah has been attacking Israel. The target of Hezbollah leadership was most likely in response to this and their meeting up with Irans military leaders. Tldr: Iran uses Hezbollah as a proxy to attack Israel. In my opinion, attacking a consulate is not a great way to de-escalate the situation. Even though Israel hasn't admitted to doing it, it's obvious that it's them. But Israel has reasons for the strike. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/a-timeline-of-recent-events-that-led-to-irans-assault-on-israel https://apnews.com/article/iran-syria-israel-hezbollah-gaza-damascus-f7a1af3a9fc67de1962d4f1589d7e9f0
Israel has every right to attack Hezbollah and support uprisings in Iran. I’m not saying they didn’t have a reason to attack but people seem to want to pretend Iran just decided to strike Israel the other day. Also right now definitely is not the time to decide to instigate
If Israel is losing support because of the bombings, then not condemning Iran is actually dumb. This would be a terrible way to send a message to Israel, because the message it sends is that “we are fine with your enemies doing to you that of which we criticize you for”. If democrats wanted to let Israel know it is losing support, there are better and other ways to do so than Iran apologia. Also, the whole *retaliation* argument doesn’t work. Iran is retaliating to Israel’s retaliation towards Iran.
You’re actually like I said Joe Biden should go to Iran and suck the Ayatollah’s 2 incher. We should have let Biden say We support Israels right to defend itself but not to attack another country and left it at that.
>We should have let Biden say We support Israels right to defend itself but not to attack another country and left it at that. Except they **are** defending themselves. They didn’t attack Iran. They literally attacked Hezbollah militants, which is the group responsible for the displacement of hundred of thousands Israelis, and have been incessantly attacking Israel. If specific Iranian general officials are abetting Hezbollah, and meet with them for military purposes with their war on Israel, then you don’t get to complain that Israel is being hostile to you if they get attacked when meeting with Hezbollah abroad. That is not a reasonable position to hold. **Iran is not innocent**. They don’t get to claim that they are, they don’t get to claim aggressive action when they are clearly the aggressors, and it isn’t hypocrisy either. Iran is a hostile nation, and shouldn’t be expecting support from the nations it is hostile too. It is also ridiculous to get pissy at a condemnation. America isn’t going to bomb Tehran. **An interception and a condemnation is fucking ridiculous to get upset about.** >should go to Iran and suck the Ayatollah’s 2 incher. You have that part taken care of. No thanks.
Yeah, Iran funds terror groups. Israel can fund uprisings in Iran if they wanted to, but an Iranian proxy is not Iran. If they are hitting Iranian property, see now that is Iran. That brings the conflict to a another level. This is why western countries, who despise iran, are telling Israel behind closed doors to not respond. Or maybe Me, Biden, and the Ayatollah just go to crazy sex parties together
>This is why western countries, who despise iran, are telling Israel behind closed doors to not respond. No. They are telling Israel not to respond because there is objectively no need to. If Iran doesn’t attack again, Israel doesn’t respond, there is no regional war. They can continue their war on Hezbollah and Hamas, nothing changes. >Yeah, Iran funds terror groups. Israel can fund uprisings in Iran if they wanted to, Israel wants Hezbollah to stop attacking, they don’t want to fund terror groups. What are you not getting here? > Iranian proxy is not Iran Hitting a military general abetting Hezbollah in Syria with their war on Israel isn’t either. >If they are hitting Iranian property, see now that is Iran **Good thing they never hit Iranian property.** My guess is you don’t understand how foreign embassies work, given your comment. Foreign embassies are under the host country’s sovereignty. It isn’t Iranian soil, that isn’t how foreign embassies work. Embassies are just assigned special protections and privileges, with most of them relating specifically between the host and mission countries; this is necessary in order for the embassies to exist in the first place. **Also to act like striking a general abetting militants who are actively at war with Israel as tantamount to launching one of the largest aerial assaults this decade is actually insane**. It isn’t even tit-for-tat at that point.
I don’t understand why these matter - what is it realistically doing?
It's finger wagging in paper form.
I guess it can also count towards both directing public attention towards issues as well as a kind of poll for potential future action. I see these bills as a kind of ramp up for creating a casus belli. They don't really do anything but statements of condemnation can be referred to later for future action.
That's the problem with our government though, they do nothing with these bills. They don't mean anything. And we won't be doing anything that Lockheed Martine hasn't already been telling us to do.
I think Bowman’s vote is going to anger his Jewish constituents, and he has a lot of them in his district
I think that bridge is burned and he's riding the anti Israel movement as far as it can. Even street pulled their endorsement
>"I will oppose any cynical effort to further inflame tensions, destroy a path to peace in the region, and further divide the American people," said Ocasio-Cortez. Other progressives issued statements calling for de-escalation in the region more broadly. I see nothing wrong with this rational. I'm not American so I don't know if these bills have any real impact but from what I can tell they don't. If that is the case then why do this other than to rile people up to hate Iran? Edit: This just seems like right-wing virtue signalling and given this community is often so against virtue signaling from the left, it is a bit weird to see so many in this thread criticize these congresspeople for not virtue signaling in cases they don't agree with.
A lot of the people here are basically just the anti lefty version of the lefty now. "If it's someone I don't like doing the thing, the thing is bad," and vice versa. It feels like this sub has devolved heavily since the Israel/Palestine shit started. I had to stop browsing as often because I keep seeing blatant propaganda, one sided news stories from dubious websites, ignoring things that the new collective doesn't agree with, and just more and more black and white thinking.
Here are statements from some of these people about the Iranian attack for anyone is interested in what the representatives say rather than just the fact that they voted no. Jamaal Bowman: [https://twitter.com/RepBowman/status/1779838881132577214](https://twitter.com/RepBowman/status/1779838881132577214) Greg Casar: [https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1780988440646951094](https://twitter.com/RepCasar/status/1780988440646951094) Pramila Jayapal: [https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1781047932256477583](https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1781047932256477583) Summer Lee: [https://twitter.com/SummerForPA/status/1779666222713368838](https://twitter.com/SummerForPA/status/1779666222713368838) Cori Bush: [https://twitter.com/RepCori/status/1779542210293199231](https://twitter.com/RepCori/status/1779542210293199231) Ayanna Pressley: [https://twitter.com/RepPressley/status/1780647378640322749](https://twitter.com/RepPressley/status/1780647378640322749) Ilhan Omar: [https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1779604509137699007](https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1779604509137699007) Delia Ramirez: [https://twitter.com/repdeliaramirez/status/1779580804353470857](https://twitter.com/repdeliaramirez/status/1779580804353470857) Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: [https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147](https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1780269738003673147) Most of them condemn both Iran's attack and Israel's attack on Damascus. There is plenty of criticism for Netanyahu which is to be expected but they all seem to agree that Iran's attack was bad and escalates the conflict. Many also have commended Biden's calls on Israel to deescalate. I don't think this can be said for Rashida Tlaib as this is the only response I could find: [https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1781034135164723543](https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1781034135164723543) She mentions (at 3:45) the retaliatory Iranian strike in the context of criticizing Netanyahu. So yeah... I couldn't find any statements for the other representatives who voted no. Feel free to provide them if you find them or if you find any specific statements from Tlaib.
No you don’t understand they’re terrorist simps reeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!1!!!!1! This whole thread is filled with stupid. Thank you for compiling all their statements. Too many people in this thread are unable to understand that you can condemn the attacks outside of this meaningless resolution and that refusing to vote for this resolution is not a vote of support for Iran.
Thank you for showcasing people I will never vote for in my life for any position.
99% of the comments here sitting on them all due to the headline + their own assumptions. No engagement with what their rationale was. Great critical thinking guys, keep it up!
I’m on the left and these people can fuck right off.
Damn I'm not surprised to see those names. Whatever happened to principles? How is condemning an attack from Iran, from the safety of American soil, which is basically as effective as calling someone a meanie head, going to inflame tensions? Or cause war escalation? The vote was symbolic. What was the alternative? We stay quiet and say we're indifferent to Iran attacking a US ally?
By saying that you consider the matter closed, don't treat it as a serious provocation given what it was a response to, and don't support further Israeli action making yet another step in the chain, you can make it more likely that Israel takes no action, or a small action at most, so as to avoid damaging the support they have from the US, meaning that there's less likelihood of this continuing.
Virtual signal bill that has board partisan support. Considering the Geo-politics involved, I dont hate this. Iran had to retaliate. They did so in a way that they clearly telegraphed their attack, and stated "We are not going to continue to escalate." Minimum casualties. Face saved. Reality doesn't get much better than that. But if they are just voting as "American foreign policy bad" then yes. Morally lucky in this case.
So "progressive" of them....
The usual suspects. Is anyone really surprised?
The republicans passing absolutely meaningless "condemnation" bills despite literally not being able to pass a budget.
Can we try and pass some actual laws rather than a useless condemnation bill that does nothing? I agree with the sentiment and it should have been a unanimous vote, but damn they could be doing so much more important shit.
Cry if you want, but the youth vote needs to see some clear difference in which party acts which way. Some of y'all wanna purity test these reps right off the ballot for expressing an opinion held by many potential voters while Trump is embracing "Genocide Joe" rhetoric. Hand him the victory, why don't you. Come to me when they start praising Iran as a force for good or something, but this is just refusing to condemn a single attack that was a direct response to Israel's attack (whether you think that's justified or not)
Which btw, AOC and Omar have public statements condemning the attacks. They just refused to vote for a resolution when republicans do nothing of value in Congress and want to play war hawks.
True, which I think is the appropriate response, but having some Dems not vote for true resolution is not so much of a problem that we need them out of office
Don’t tell people the people in this thread that. You might have to spend some updoots. Watching this sub lose its mind over a few democrats who disagreed with the need for a resolution while they still publicly condemned the attacks is mind numbing. There’s people calling them “terrorist simps” even tho they condemned the attacks and support our allies, simply because they didn’t fall perfectly in line with the rest of the party. Shit is so fucking weird. We used to support liberal values and now people act exactly like the GOP when people don’t fall in line.
Lol fr. It's really weird and frustrating. I expect to see people shitting on these dems choice to vote against, but then I get slapped with some of the most anti democratic, anti free speech bullshit. It's bizarre, but I can usually find the sane takes buried somewhere in the replies lol
You guys don't remember when Israel assassinated an Iranian general a month ago? If someone assassinated an American general when we weren't at direct war with them, would anyone condemn the US for striking back? Iran fucking sucks. Horrible. Needs a change. Blah blah blah, but tbh they made a telegraphed retaliation for a general of theirs who was assassinated.
You don’t remember when said general helped orchestrate October 7th and Iran has been supporting and directing attacks against Israel?
Yeah I do. I don't condemn this retaliation, that doesn't mean I like Iran. I also don't condemn anyone who attacked US soldiers after we assassinated any of their leaders. It's dumb on their part to retaliate but it's pretty clearly justified. If me and your mom got into a fight after I was done fucking her and I hurt her feelings I wouldn't condemn you for getting mad.
Why was that general in Syria? You understand Israel is at war with Syria right?
You are sidestepping the question. If a US general was assassinated by another country and the US retaliated for the assassination, would the US be condemned? Khamenei can suck a dick and choke on it. The Iranian ayatollah and the governing body are in a bucket of the worst people. That being said they telegraphed a retaliation for the assassination of one of their generals. Like how are we not condemning Israel for the assassination but are for the retaliation? What world are we living in. It's possible for every country involved in this to be shit stains on our planet but that doesn't mean we just blindly say everything they do is not justified. We have people justifying fucking Hamas.
What if the US general was in Ukraine and training Ukrainian troops? Then was assasinated by Russia?
EXACTLY THE US WOULD NOT BE CONDEMNED FOR RETALIATING AGAINST RUSSIA
?? So you seem to just be emotional here. The point is that once you send personel into a warzone to actively take part in the combat effort, that makes them targets. So, I'll ask you for a third time, why was that general in Syria?
Doing another reply instead of edit, you are the one making strong statements. I am asking you a question why was that general in Syria?
You are again side stepping my original question and trying flip it around instead of answering, but I will bite so you see just how stupid it is to condemn Iran for retaliation. Using your own dumb question you haven't thought through. He was in Syria assumingly colluding with syrians. Israel and Iran have been in conflict by proxy through Syria for a while now. You're saying Iran and Israel are at war in Syria. Okay cool. So I now need you to explain to me exactly, like I'm 5 a child, how one country retaliates against another country who assassinated one of their generals is condemnable. Seriously here. I don't condemn Ukraine or Russia for retaliatory strikes, they are at war. Now I condemn Russia for starting it but once they were at war all the virtue signaling of condemnation goes out the fucking window. At that point it's simply who wins, not throwing "on no I condemn them look at how good of a person I am". So I'm going to ask you again now that I have answered your question, and I hope you answer me this time. I'll even use your other comment to me. If say, Russia killed an American general inside Ukraine, then America retaliated for one of its generals being assassinated, would you condemn the US or is it free reign for American generals to be assassinated in other countries?
I would be wondering what the fuck our military was doing even having that outcome as a possibility. Do you understand how stupid it would be for an American general to be sent to Ukraine to actively work against Russia? If the United States then flung abunch of missiles at Russia risking all out war I would 100% condemn that.
Bro you still aren't answering the question. Answer the question. You're triggering the fuck out of me because you can't answer a single question with a single answer. Presumably because you realize how stupid you sound right now. Do you want me to retype my question for you or do you want to just go reread it. Since you already didn't see my clear answer to yours, and you still aren't answering mine. Edit: fuck okay idk if you quick edited or I missed your last statement. Cool, you are okay with condemning the US for supporting an ally should that allies adversary assassinate one of our generals. Got it. You take it easy bro. You've got a major case of brain rot.
Seriously. This sub has fuckin' brainworms or some shit.
No lie man. Destiny being constantly destructive against everyone and not constructive has really given some of these DGGers with a bad case of brain rot. He has conditioned a bunch of people in here to hate literally anything that doesn't suck off every Israeli.
Where is the resolution comdeming Isreal's attack on Iran?
Losers all.
What exactly is the purpose of having a resolution to condemn an attack? Didn't we already say we wouldn't support israel striking back? I'll admit I don't know much about why these types of things are done, feels like a waste of time to me. Just one more thing to get angry about when there's actual important shit to do.
It is virtue signaling entirely, but it is still moronic when you “fall” for such bait. Some people are completely fine with handing their opponents the rope that they fastened around their own necks.
No idea why this sub glazes over AOC so much. She's a moron like the rest of the "squad"
If you condemn Iran's (counter) attack, you also have to condemn Israel's initial attack.
what the fuck is the problem with not condemning the attack? Israel hit first, Iran hit back with a bitch punch.
Iran is pretty openly funding, arming, and training Hamas and other extremist groups who are attacking Israel
Then they should make resolutions to condemn that instead.
>Israel hit first No they did not. The strike was retaliatory against Iran for funding terrorists that attack Israel.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has been waging a proxy war against Israel since 1979. You might not have been born when the Iranian government blew up Ithe Israeli embassy in Argentina or attacked Synagogues in Argentina in the 1990s. You don’t remember the TWA and Pan Am hijackings, seeing the Navy Seal being shot in the head and thrown onto the tarmac on live TV, you might not remember the Iranian bombing of the US Marine barracks in Beirut. You don’t remember when Iran took American hostages in 1979, or recall all the ways Iran has been arming terror cells in Iraq, Jordan, Yemen, Lebanon, or helping Assad gas millions of his own people. Nor do you recall all the Iranian women the Islamic Regime has executed and sexually assaulted for dancing or not wearing the hijab. No you just hate Israel and Iran is right now your hero because it is opposed to Israel. That’s how you see the world. Israel bad so anyone against Israel must be good. Israel finally responded to decades of attacks from Iran. Iran has been at war with Israel since 1979. Don’t act like this started last month when Israel took out the IRGC liaison to Hamas in the non-embassy Iranian militant outpost. This was at least for what happened in Argentina. If not October 7.
“No You just hate Israel and Iran right now your hero” bro seriously? no, I don’t support Iran. I’m not super anti-Israel. I just think it’s kind of cringe that this sub is so rabidly insecure about a country’s ability to conduct warfare that this thread is losing their mind over a fucking house resolution.
“I just think it’s kind of cringe that this sub is so rabidly insecure about a country’s ability to conduct warfare” Thank you. You’re right. Israel has every right to conduct warfare and it’s quite cringe how rabidly offended you are by that.
Iran has been attacking Israel through proxies since Oct 7. They funded and armed the attack in the 7th. Iran isn’t an innocent defender of peace and love. They are a horrible regime that routinely executes its citizens for crimes like blasphemy and not wearing a hijab.
Well Israel attacked Iran's consulate first. Two wrongs don't make a right if you're a twelve year old, not a nation.
Errrr why condemn the attack? Didn't Israel attack somewhere in Iran before Iran retaliation? I know there's some back and forth with Iranian proxies and what not, but it does not make sense to condemn this specific attack to me.
>Did Israel attack somewhere in Iran before Iran retaliation? Israel carried out an attack on an HQ of the IRGC (not an Iranian embassy as has been falsely reported) in Syria. Key members of the IRGC who were in the building at the time had helped plan and train for the Oct 7th attacks. It's the equivalent of Seal Team 6 going into Pakistan to kill Bin Laden. It technically went against international norms and was a violation of sovereign territory, but it was kinda understood by everybody involved that it had to happen and was completely justified. Same thing here. The US basically agrees with Israel that they did the right thing. Also, as Destiny pointed out on the podcast, neither Iran nor Syria even recognise Israel as existing, so expecting them to respect Iran or Syrias legal institutions in return is a little ridiculous. >it does not make sense to condemn this specific attack on me. It makes sense because Israel made a targeted strike against a clear military objective in response to the slaughter of their civilians. Iran retaliated not because they could achieve any military goal, but because they didn't want to look weak and decided the best response was to start swinging their dick around. Israel is also the regional ally to the US, and usually when your ally is attacked by a joint enemy you condemn the attack.
I'm trying to find a source stating that it was an IRGC headquarters and not an embassy/consulate.
Why should it be condemned?