Everyone knows if you’re going to get a bill passed in the US Senate, the best thing you can do is include something in them where individuals can’t trade with Israel anymore. Like Cuba. Just cutting off the flow of military aid would be useless and not accomplish anything, unless we included that totally possible and sensible step in addition, and then asked all the senators to vote on it.
I am honestly a little bit surprised to see so many people eager to jump up and provide examples of the type of bad faith argument I was talking about in my original comment.
Failing to call it a genocide in 77 years is not moving a goalpost. Its basic human decency
I am honestly a little bit surprised to see so many people eager to jump up and provide examples of the type of bad faith argument I was talking about in my original comment.
Bad faith is what Bernie has done, always blaming Nentanyahu, continuing the flow of any arms, trade and people to the settler state.
Ah yes, who could forget that time he fought to continue the flow of any arms, trade, and people to the settler state. Which bill was that that he supported? What was the exception carved out, how was it carved out? Clearly I’m super clueless on this topic, what year did he introduce the bill? I want to know, maybe you can help me understand. I know there must have been hundreds if not thousands that he introduced, so just focus on one. Tell me.
The bill blocks a particular sale by Trump of weapons to Israel. It’s not just offensive weapons, it’s a specific list of weapons (everything in Trump’s attempt) plus some US military support services “and other related elements of logistics and program support.” What’s carved out of it? It looks to me like it’s blocking literally the entire sale.
I am done with this exchange, it is abundantly clear that you’re happy to continue talking bollocks for as long as I’m willing to respond to you. It’s been educational though! Like I say, I’m a little bit surprised that people popped up to do exactly what I described in the original comment, and also in a particularly ham-handed manner that makes it pretty obvious that they’re just casting around for reasons to shit on Sanders.
Surprisingly enough, a one-sentence Twitter link has led you astray!
Bernie’s communication director lied? That sounds like a bad thing to do given they could be complicit in genocide.
The bill blocks a particular sale by Trump of weapons to Israel.
So only offensive weapons then…
What’s carved out of it?
Carved out is the absence of Bernie blocking the iron dome missiles that israel uses to act with impunity… Bernie would never touch them since the existence of the occupation is necessary in his mind.
Hey wait, don’t go. So there’s a prize hidden in one of those YouTube videos: Bernie Sanders says something about AIPAC. What does he have to say about it? I’ll give you an upvote if you can find it and tell me.
Whee look at the goalposts go
Everyone knows if you’re going to get a bill passed in the US Senate, the best thing you can do is include something in them where individuals can’t trade with Israel anymore. Like Cuba. Just cutting off the flow of military aid would be useless and not accomplish anything, unless we included that totally possible and sensible step in addition, and then asked all the senators to vote on it.
I am honestly a little bit surprised to see so many people eager to jump up and provide examples of the type of bad faith argument I was talking about in my original comment.
Why are you making up what I said?
Failing to call it a genocide in 77 years is not moving a goalpost. Its basic human decency
Bad faith is what Bernie has done, always blaming Nentanyahu, continuing the flow of any arms, trade and people to the settler state.
Ah yes, who could forget that time he fought to continue the flow of any arms, trade, and people to the settler state. Which bill was that that he supported? What was the exception carved out, how was it carved out? Clearly I’m super clueless on this topic, what year did he introduce the bill? I want to know, maybe you can help me understand. I know there must have been hundreds if not thousands that he introduced, so just focus on one. Tell me.
https://x.com/anna_bahr/status/1950335108864479631
“Offensive” arms only.
Surprisingly enough, a one-sentence Twitter link has led you astray!
https://www.commondreams.org/news/sanders-force-vote-israel-weapons-sales
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/34/text
The bill blocks a particular sale by Trump of weapons to Israel. It’s not just offensive weapons, it’s a specific list of weapons (everything in Trump’s attempt) plus some US military support services “and other related elements of logistics and program support.” What’s carved out of it? It looks to me like it’s blocking literally the entire sale.
I am done with this exchange, it is abundantly clear that you’re happy to continue talking bollocks for as long as I’m willing to respond to you. It’s been educational though! Like I say, I’m a little bit surprised that people popped up to do exactly what I described in the original comment, and also in a particularly ham-handed manner that makes it pretty obvious that they’re just casting around for reasons to shit on Sanders.
Bernie’s communication director lied? That sounds like a bad thing to do given they could be complicit in genocide.
So only offensive weapons then…
Carved out is the absence of Bernie blocking the iron dome missiles that israel uses to act with impunity… Bernie would never touch them since the existence of the occupation is necessary in his mind.
Yes yes please continue, I’m totally listening
You got the one example you wanted and you want to duck out already?
You don’t get to make a massive post shaming people for criticising a politician and then get upset when people respond.
Hey wait, don’t go. So there’s a prize hidden in one of those YouTube videos: Bernie Sanders says something about AIPAC. What does he have to say about it? I’ll give you an upvote if you can find it and tell me.
Totally