Probably the parts where you said "Biden has given Israel everything they want", which is blatantly false, and your statement that "They are doing the same amount of genocide", which cannot be meaningfully assessed when the genocide in Gaza only ramped up under Biden -- and there is good reason to believe that Trump would, in fact, be much worse.

The Dems are evil, but being dishonest about their flaws is foolish, unproductive, and deserving of censorship.

Well you did say that Dems and Republicans are supporting the same amount of genocide when clearly Republicans are the only one of the two supporting the genocide happening to the Ukrainian people.

I watched the presidential debate between Harris and Trump, and one of Harris's main talking points was that the Republicans weren't doing enough at the border.

Insulting people is how you get voters, right?

I know Lemmy isn't the place to speak badly of anyone far to the left, but honestly?

If they aren't going to be persuaded to vote Harris by the other side of the ticket, I'm not optimistic they'll be persuaded by people on the Internet being sweet and polite to them.

So imo, who gives a shit about insulting them? It's pretty clear OP wasn't intending a post like this to win hearts and minds.

i mean, to my knowledge maybe i'm wrong i don't follow this conflict very closely, but so far the only source i've seen for it being genocide was the ICJ ruling that it "might be genocide if this continues getting worse" which i dont believe was followed up on.

A number of history scholars or whoever have claimed that it "amounts to genocide" or is "effectively genocide" (im being really generous with the phrasing here) which people have equated to mean "there is genocide"

The ICC has put out a warrant for the funny israeli guy, doesn't mention genocide.

I don't know if any countries have explicitly called it genocide? Aside from maybe south africa, idk how they raised the case. But if you know of any cases, inform me, i am actually curious about that one.

and if we go with a strict definition of genocide, I.E. "strictly killing related to ethnicity" and extrapolate that to a test of "would the killing stop if the conflict stopped" i personally so no reason why israel would continue to kill people in the same capacity as they are not, or at all, if the conflict magically stopped entirely.

People also point to the UN definition of genocide being incredibly broad. The US bombing japan in WW2 would arguably be genocide under that definition, most wars would constitute genocide. Now to be clear, i don't think it's bad, it's just a legal definition, meant to be held out in a court of law, which usually tend to be pretty vague, until tried.

Frankly, i think it would also be rather unprecedented for someone in a higher position of power to call this a "genocide" as well. Who knows what kind of a mess that would entail. It's certainly not something you want to throw around if you want the rest of the government, and the american public to like you. Which is, the goal of politics.

I don't really see any reasonable expectation for her to call it a genocide. Expectation to callout war crimes and various other wrong doings? As well as retracting support? Absolutely.

Although little fun fact, right now the harris campaign isn't running on policy, as policy gives something for trump to attack, so without policy he can't attack anything she says, aside from her character, so it's pretty likely they're trying to outwit trump in that regard, if you're wondering why she doesn't talk about things like this more specifically.

The best way to help civilians is to make Israel afraid to piss off its neighbors.

But you see, Israel existing at all is what pisses off its neighbors and that will never change no matter what they do or don't do.

They know.