Almost 90 bombs were dropped in one region in just 24 hours.
Russia unleashed an unprecedented bombardment in southern Ukraine overnight in what local officials described as a “massive attack” in the conflict which has continued to rage even as the international community’s attention has moved to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
The Ukrainian Internal Affairs Ministry on Monday morning said Russia dropped at least “87 aerial bombs on populated areas of the Kherson region - the largest number for all time.” At least eight people were also injured in other Russian strikes carried out in the Odessa region further to the west on Sunday night.
Genocide Joe? 🙄
And who should voters replace him with, Mr Answers?
People are really working to rob that word of all meaning
“We are all domestic terrorists”
That’s what they do.
Edit: They even called the congressman who pulled the fire alarm to delay voting so people could read the bill, an insurrectionist.
Are they? Or do you just not consider Arab people humans? Maybe specifically Palestinians are the bad ones we can exterminate, in your mind?
Which Arab nations have Joe Biden exterminated, exactly?
So if it’s not a genocide until you finish the job, you think the Nazis are innocent, I take it?
Which Arab nations are Joe Biden currently exterminating, then?
I reject the premise of your comment.
neener neener poo poo to you as well
Its been standing US policy to dehumanize Arab people since at least 2001.
Since the shores of Tripoli
I see downvotes but I see no interaction with the two true assertions that make for this argument. Biden has the immediate power to stop this. And the this is a genocide of Palestinians.
And how exactly would he do that? I wasn’t aware he was The King of Israel. Should he threaten to nuke them?
Israel is a client state of the US. Biden could simply threaten to revoke aid and they would immediately stop the bombing. Their defense minister said so outright not long ago.
Liberals tell you they’re powerless so they can pretend to be good people who simply have no means to stop the status quo. Don’t believe them on either part.
Maybe
Stop sending billions in bombs to them knowing they’re gonna blow up Palestinian kids with them.
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2021/05/24/ronald-reagan-wasnt-afraid-to-use-leverage-to-hold-israel-to-task/
In addition to not vetoing UN resolutions, Reagan took several actions that many in Israel and the United States perceived as anti-Israel. For example, on June 7, 1981, less than six months after Reagan took office, Israel launched a surprise bombing raid on the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak, and, in so doing, violated the airspace of Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Reagan not only supported UNSC Resolution 487, which condemned the attack, but he also criticized the raid publicly and suspended the delivery of advanced F-16 fighter jets to Israel. Moreover, over the strident objections of Israel and the pro-Israel U.S. lobby groups, Reagan approved the sale of advanced reconnaissance aircraft (AWACS ) to Saudi Arabia, which Israel then viewed as a hostile state.
A year later, in August 1982, when Israeli forces advanced beyond southern Lebanon and began shelling the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) in Beirut, Reagan responded with an angry call to Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, demanding a halt to the operation.
In addition, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, Reagan intervened directly when Israel threatened to blow up the Commodore Hotel in downtown Beirut, which housed more than 100 western reporters. As David Ottaway, who was then the Washington Post Middle East correspondent and was in the building, pointed out, the Israeli defense minister did not like the media coverage the invasion was getting and wanted to close down the media center.
Biden, on the other hand, even though he had an hour’s notice, failed to intervene to stop Netanyahu from bombing and collapsing the 12-story building that housed the offices of Al Jazeera and the Associated Press in Gaza during the recent bombing campaign. He also failed to publicly condemn the attack, let alone challenge Israel’s contention that the building sheltered Hamas military intelligence assets, despite AP’s insistence that its staff had no evidence that such assets were or ever had been present.
In addition to allowing the UN resolutions to pass and suspending the F-16 delivery, Reagan also restricted aid and military assistance to Israel to help force its withdrawal of troops from Beirut and central Lebanon.
Therefore, if in the future some members of the Biden administration or Congress want to join the international community in condemning Israel’s behavior, or in conditioning U.S. assistance or arms transfers and face resistance from Republicans, they need only point to the precedents established by President Reagan in the first instance.
First of all, fuck Ronald Reagan.
Second, BIDEN IS NOT THE FUCKING PRESIDENT OF ISRAEL.
Repeating the same meaningless thought terminator like a fucking child
Neither was Reagan. What does it say that Biden’s worse on Israel foreign policy than Hollywood’s biggest ghoul?
Top UN officials have called this a a textbook case of genocide in all aspects. Even BEFORE Oct 7.
You are a modern holocaust denier. A special thing to observe.
Asserting that Joe Biden hasn’t committed any genocides is not denying the holocaust. You know this very well, I think.
If you have to choose between Hitler and Stalin consider voting for a third party or not voting.
Voting for any person means you approve of their actions and you are complicit and responsible for them.
I don’t think it means that necessarily. It’s just as valid to vote strategically against an even worse party if they have a chance of winning. It’s not morally contentious to vote for the lesser of two evils.
If you keep voting for the lesser of two evils there will never an incentive for a good one to show up because you won’t vote for them anyways.
You’re too busy voting for Genocide Joe.
Well I Iive in Canada but point taken. I’m still not sure I agree that it’s on the voter to let the worse party win just to support a burgeoning better one. I’d say the responsibility is on that better party to secure their base and show a reasonable chance to win before asking voters to risk the worse party winning.
I can agree that concessions need to be made but any party that supports literal should never ever receive a vote.
In that case it’s time to pull out the classic
https://media.tenor.com/2-5XPoT_7esAAAAC/are-we-the-baddies-bad.gif
The moral option is then a third party that doesn’t support genocide to show that any party supporting it will never win your vote.