152

“The truth is that from a legal perspective, these resolutions are not complicated,” Sanders said during a press conference Tuesday, alongside Sens. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.; Peter Welch, D-Vt.; and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. “They are cut and dry. The United States government is currently in violation of the law, and every member of the Senate who believes in the rule of law should vote for these resolutions.”

Despite aid groups reporting that Israel has continued to block humanitarian aid into Gaza, the White House overlooked the blown deadline last week, saying that it will continue to provide weapons to Israel. The decision stands in direct violation of existing U.S. law preventing the government from sending weapons to countries that block U.S.-backed humanitarian assistance.

With the Biden administration unwilling to act and legislation targeting pro-Palestinian nonprofits still advancing, pro-Palestinian advocates and their allies in Congress argue that passing the joint resolutions is likely the last real opportunity for Democrats to address the crisis in Gaza before Republicans take control in January.

Despite Democrats’ unwillingness to vote for conditioning military aid to Israel in the past, Araabi hopes that at least some of the lame-duck senators who won’t be returning in January will take this opportunity to cement an anti-genocide record.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] yeahiknow3 -3 points 2 days ago

Can you give an example from, say, the last decade? Just one example will do.

[-] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I mean, trump pardoned a bunch of us government contracted (by the military) mercenaries who were convicted(by a US federal Court) of killing Iraqi civilians in 2014. The act of pardoning such criminals is in itself a war crime, and occurred in 2020.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago

It wasn't a bunch, it was one guy. He was court marshalled, and his own men testified against him. He was found guilty and stripped of rank. He was about to be sentenced to federal lockup for war crimes. THEN Trump pardoned him against the wishes of the US Military. I think your apples and oranges comparison failed.

[-] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

You asked for one example, I gave you one. Literally the incoming commander in chief committing a war crime 4 years ago.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago

I didn't ask you. I clarified for you

[-] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Not this decade, but during the battles of Fallujah we gave the civilians there 24 hours to evacuate, and then after that the official rules of engagement were pretty damn close to "everyone left is presumed to be an Al Qaeda militant." They were allowed to shoot people with phones or radios in their hands on sight. We also bombed the fuck out of that city, including with white phosphorous. We know WP was used because there was a recorded friendly fire incident with it.

And all of this was basically reprisal for the killings of those four Blackwater mercenaries.

[-] yeahiknow3 0 points 2 days ago

Not this decade

So, no?

I can answer for you. The US betrayal of their Kurdish allies was evil and that was fairly recent.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago

The reason white phosphorus was used in Fallujah. If you've ever been to an Arab city, you'll note that sometimes in markets, cloth is hung over the streets. This cloth provides shade to shoppers. Fallujah had more of that than usual, it masked movement from sight overhead. So, to get rid of it, they dropped white phosphorus to burn it away.

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

right, also known as a war crime.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago
[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Did you ready the Leahy law? I did.
Also the UN and ICC ruled on it. I imagine during their ruling on that they "read the law" and that you have no idea what you are talking about.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)
[-] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

A logical and strategic justification. Still a literal warcrime.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago
[-] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Protocol on incendiary weapons states that using them in civilian area, such as in a marketplace in an urban area that was not properly evacuated, is prohibited.

And we actually signed that one, which is surprising considering how many protocols and treaties we are not party to.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago

It was used as flares not as an incendiary.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -4 points 2 days ago

Not really. White phosphorus is used for many things, mostly making smoke. It only becomes a crime when you use it against people.

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

And, blocked user. You have yourself a nice day now "rapidcreek"

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world -3 points 2 days ago

Sorry if the truth offends you.

this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
152 points (93.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2275 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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

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

Example:

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

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

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

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS