this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
347 points (98.1% liked)

politics

24870 readers
3433 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

"If you're saying I voted for military funding, you are lying," she wrote. "Drag me for my positions all you want, but lying about them doesn't make you part of the 'left.' If you believe neo-Nazis are welcome and operating in good faith, you can have them."

She did though, right?

[–] dukeofdummies@lemmy.world 7 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Like, the most devils advocate I can be for her vote is that she's arguing that we shouldn't take away their shield, we should take away their spear.

To which... I still don't see the logic. Because if you can block with one hand you're free to stab with the other. If all you have is stabby implements, you got no way to deal with when they stab back.

They'd be forced to be less aggressive, which they seem intent to be.

[–] Aspharr@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

The best explanation I heard was that any funding at all, even if it's for a "defensive" weapon, is still funding that makes doing their genocide easier.

Another good take I heard is something along the lines of "they have healthcare and we don't, they can fund their fucking iron dome themselves".

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

They're not entitled to billions of dollars of our money every year. Especially when they continually treat Palestinians the way they do.

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

I'm tired of giving them fucking ANYTHING. They routinely brutalize a people they keep stateless. It would be bad enough not putting diplomatic pressure on them to try to stop let alone give them billions of our tax dollars every year.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

It's not military when it's a defensive rocket battery staffed by military dumb dumb

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

Sure hoping that's sarcasm, for you sake.

[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

If it's purely defensive weapon then why don't they sell them to Russia, Iran or North Korea?

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 4 points 15 hours ago

Or better yet, and more to the point, if they're just defensive, why aren't we giving the Gazans and iron dome system to shoot down any Israeli aircraft that cross into their skies? The Gazans have just as much right to armed self defense as the Israelis do.

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago

She also throws Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar and Al Green under the bus to make this stupid rant.