Politics & Stuff

[Vesper 28,366]

12 minutes ago, Vesper said:

absolute madness by the yanks (the fucking Democratic leaders even signed off on this shitbaggery, and many in their own party are losing their minds)

anyone who tries and deny the Israel lobby has the American government (regardless of Party in so many cases) by the jacobs is either a wilfull liar or a fool

Netanyahu accepts invitation to address joint session of Congress

‘I’m excited for the privilege’ of making Israel’s case to the American people and the world, says the prime minister after bipartisan leadership sends formal letter

https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-accepts-invitation-to-address-joint-session-of-congress/

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Saturday accepted an invitation to address a joint session of Congress.

He said that he was “excited for the privilege to present in front of the representatives of the American people and the entire world the truth about our just war against those who wish to kill us.”

The statement from the Prime Minister’s Office boasted that he would be the first world leader to address a joint session of Congress for a fourth time. He is currently tied at three with Britain’s wartime prime minister, Winston Churchill.

No date has been set, but the speech is expected to take place “as soon as the next eight weeks or soon after August recess,” a source familiar with the matter told The Hill.

On Friday, US Congressional leaders from both parties sent Netanyahu the invitation, a show of wartime support for longtime ally Israel despite mounting political divisions over the war against Hamas in Gaza.

In the letter, the congressional leaders said the invitation was extended to “highlight America’s solidarity with Israel.”

The letter was signed by House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a Democrat, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican.

“We invite you to share the Israeli government’s vision for defending democracy, combatting terror and establishing a just and lasting peace in the region,” they wrote.

An Israeli official confirmed Netanyahu’s receipt of the invitation to reporters.

The Hill said the invitation — first suggested by Johnson — was issued after weeks of delay caused by Schumer, who gave a speech on the Senate floor in March calling for early elections in Israel to replace Netanyahu. Schumer ultimately acquiesced, saying he was prepared to cooperate in a Netanyahu address as long as it was done in a bipartisan way.

“The horrific attacks of October 7th shocked the world and forced your nation into a fight for its very existence. We join the State of Israel in your struggle against terror, especially as Hamas continues to hold American and Israeli citizens captive and its leaders jeopardize regional stability,” the letter reads. “For this reason, on behalf of the bipartisan leadership of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate, we would like to invite you to address a Joint Meeting of Congress.”

An official familiar with the matter told The Times of Israel that Netanyahu had been speaking in recent weeks to Republican Congressional leaders about a potential joint session address, viewing it as an opportunity to make Israel’s case on the global stage and is less concerned about some of the political fallout within the US.

Republicans, including presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, have been eager to display their support for Netanyahu and expose the Democratic divisions over Israel.

Nearly 60 Democrats boycotted Netanyahu’s last joint session address in 2015, which was organized by Republican Congressional leaders behind the back of then-US president Barack Obama in order for the Israeli premier to lobby against the nuclear deal that Washington wound up signing with Iran later that year.

A much larger number of Democrats would likely boycott a Netanyahu speech, as the war in Gaza has become increasingly unpopular among progressives.

The war sparked by Hamas’s October 7 atrocities has also led to a rupture in Netanyahu’s relationship with US President Joe Biden, who in May threatened for the first time  to withhold weapons from Israel if it launched a massive offensive in the civilian areas of Rafah.

While Netanyahu has shored up the invite from Congress, he has not yet received one from the White House and making the trip to Washington without one would only further highlight the divides.

Even before October 7, Netanyahu had not received an invite to the White House since his return to office in late 2022, as he quickly drew Biden’s ire over his efforts to radically overhaul Israel’s judiciary and actions seen as harming the US administration’s attempt to preserve prospects for a two-state solution. Biden visited Israel shortly after the Hamas-led attack, in the first-ever trip a US president has made to the Jewish state amid a war.

Friday’s invitation notably came minutes after Biden gave a speech presenting what he said was the latest Israeli proposal for a hostage deal and ceasefire to end the war, and calling on Hamas to accept the offer.

A congressional aide told The Times of Israel that Schumer’s office coordinated with the White House on the matter.

 

and Netanyahu now is already cock-slapping the hapless Biden square in the face:

 

Netanyahu says no Gaza ceasefire until Israel’s war aims are achieved, raising questions over Biden peace proposal

https://news.yahoo.com/news/netanyahu-says-no-gaza-ceasefire-171215126.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Saturday that the conditions for ending the country’s war in Gaza “have not changed,” raising questions over a peace proposal laid out by US President Joe Biden which he said Israel submitted.

During a speech Friday, Biden said Hamas had been degraded to a point where it can no longer carry out the type of attack seen on October 7 that launched the current war. Part of the agreement, he said, would see a truce and hostage exchange while Israel and Hamas negotiate a permanent end to the fighting.

It was perhaps the furthest Biden has gone in telling Israel its stated goals for its operation in Gaza have been met, and that the time has arrived to stop the fighting.

The proposal has been welcomed across the international community. The UN, the UK, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE have all expressed support for Biden’s proposal, while Qatar and Egypt joined the US in calling on Israel and Hamas to “finalize” the proposed ceasefire agreement.

For its part, Hamas said it viewed the plan “positively” and is ready “to deal positively and constructively with any proposal based on a permanent ceasefire.”

But a statement from the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office on Saturday said Israel’s goals — “the destruction of Hamas military and governing capabilities, the freeing of all hostages and ensuring that Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel” — would need to be met before a permanent ceasefire can begin.

“Under the proposal, Israel will continue to insist these conditions are met before a permanent ceasefire is put in place. The notion that Israel will agree to a permanent ceasefire before these conditions are fulfilled is a non-starter,” the statement said.

Saturday’s statement largely reiterated earlier comments from the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) made less than an hour after Biden detailed the peace proposal on Friday, with Netanyahu insisting the country would not end the war until Hamas is defeated and all hostages had been returned.

snip

 

Biden’s ‘non-starter’ Gaza ceasefire deal only demonstrates his lack of influence

The US president’s announcement on Friday suggested a ceasefire might be close, but Benjamin Netanyahu’s rebuke was swift and decisive

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/01/biden-gaza-ceasefire-deal-lack-of-influence-netanyahu

The latest peace plan for Gaza was given a launch worthy of a historic turning point, with the US president delivering remarks directly to camera from the White House state dining room, declaring it finally “time for this war to end”.

Yet even as Joe Biden spelled out the proposal – leading in theory to a permanent end to hostilities, large-scale food deliveries and the start of reconstruction, there was clearly something awry.

If this plan was an Israeli proposal as Biden claimed, why was it being launched by Biden in Washington? There had been no word from Israel. By the time Biden began his remarks, it was already Friday night in the Middle East, the sabbath was under way and government offices closed.

When the prime minister’s office did produce a statement in response, it exuded all the reluctance and irritation of a politician roused from sleep. Yes, Benjamin Netanyahu had “authorised the negotiating team to present a proposal” but it was one that would “enable Israel to continue the war until all its objectives are achieved”.

A second statement issued after daybreak was even blunter. Any plan that did not achieve Israel’s war aims, including the destruction of Hamas’s military and governing capacity, was a “non-starter”.

US officials argued the deal would fulfil Israel’s essential security requirements so there was ultimately no conflict, but there was no getting around Netanyahu’s choice of language, which made it clear he was not the author of the new plan, but a grudging participant. It also appeared designed to humiliate Biden. An experienced communicator like Netanyahu would know that the phrase “non-starter” would appear in the morning’s headlines alongside pictures of the president making his bid for peace.

By now, Biden is used to humiliation at Netanyahu’s hands. In early May, he warned that if the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) went into Rafah: “I’m not supplying the weapons”. Three weeks on, Israeli tanks have rolled into central and western Rafah, Gaza’s southernmost city, which has been a refuge for more than 1 million displaced Palestinians. Nearly a million have had to flee for their lives once more.

Biden has not delivered on his threat to curb arms deliveries, which would have triggered outrage from not just Republicans but pro-Israel Democrats. Administration officials have instead sought to parse what “going into Rafah” means. When he issued his ultimatum a month ago, Biden had suggested it meant the IDF advancing to the city’s “population centres”. That has clearly already happened, but US officials are now arguing the forays so far have not been “major operations”.

It was left to the administration’s head of international aid, Samantha Power, to point out that even with supposedly limited operations, the humanitarian impact was just as bad and that “the catastrophic consequences that we have long warned about are becoming a reality”.

As for the proposal itself, there is a lot of old wine in the new bottle. Phase one involves an exchange of wounded, elderly and female hostages for Palestinian detainees during a six-week ceasefire, the same basic plan that collapsed at talks in Cairo just under a month ago after months of haggling.

Getting to phase two in the new plan involves the same sort of wishful thinking as the old plan – that carefully chosen words could bridge the divide between Hamas’s demand that the cessation of hostilities be permanent, and Israel’s insistence that the war must continue up to Hamas’s destruction.

Biden’s claim to be presenting a new plan did have some substance. A week ago in Paris, the CIA and Mossad chiefs, William Burns and David Barnea, met the Qatari prime minister, Mohammed Bin Abdulrahman al-Thani, and made progress on a revised framework.

Barnea offered some Israeli concessions. They would accept fewer hostages, there would be an agreed target for the level of humanitarian assistance (600 trucks a day), and the right of displaced Gazans to return to their homes right across the coastal strip was underlined. Just as importantly, Israeli negotiators accepted that even if the parties had not reached agreement on the conditions for phase two to begin after the six weeks of phase one, the ceasefire would be extended as long as talks continued, so an impasse would not trigger renewed bombing.

According to news website Axios, Netanyahu initially rejected the new proposal, but relented under pressure from the military and intelligence chiefs and the other members of the war cabinet. That would explain why he left it to Biden to unveil the plan, and his less than half-hearted response.

That response was a reminder to the US president of the limitations on his influence in the region. Netanyahu, who on Saturday accepted an invitation to address a joint session of Congress in coming months, has the power to do further damage to Biden’s frail election campaign.

Biden cannot do the same to Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister’s political career rests instead in the hands of far-right members of the coalition, who say they will walk out if he agrees a ceasefire deal.

For its part, Hamas responded to Biden’s announcement by saying it was ready to respond to the proposal “positively and constructively”. But it has a record of changing its position radically in the course of negotiations, and for failing to come up with basic requirements for a deal, like the list of Israeli hostages it would exchange.

The new peace plan faces the same fundamental problem as its predecessors. On Friday Biden talked about the thousands of lives lost on both sides, but those lives are not a priority for either side.

The Hamas leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, was ready to see it burn in the hope that it would bring the region down in flames and leave Israel in ashes. For Netanyahu, political survival and insulation from looming corruption charges depend on the war continuing.

At least the ceasefire talks will start again, bringing a small measure of renewed hope, but if they are to succeed, it will have to be in spite of the leadership on both sides.

Edited June 2 by Vesper

[robsblubot 3,464]

Smart move. It will get Biden a lot of political points.

from now until Election Day decisions will be very political in nature. That’s how the game is played.

[Vesper 28,366]

 

[Vesper 28,366]

Why Israel is in deep trouble: John Mearsheimer with Tom Switzer

 

[NikkiCFC 7,900]

 

[NikkiCFC 7,900]

My gym forbid tank tops... Where this world is going?

[Vesper 28,366]

5 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

My gym forbid tank tops... Where this world is going?

too much side boob?

🤣

[YorkshireBlue 3,118]

10 hours ago, robsblubot said:

Good for you. That's a very selfish way of thinking.

How is it selfish? His way of thinking is exactly that, he doesn't have to think about you or anybody else especially when it comes to anything political, if ppl don't like something, that's there problem not anybody else's, what's selfish is people ramming there beliefs political views and any other views down people's throats just because they don't agree.

This is my view

Politics is a waste of time it's all corrupt 

There are only 2 genders 

Religion is the number 1 reason for all wars and it's all bollocks 

White American college students are the dumbest MFs  currently on the planet 

I honestly couldn't give 2 wanks if u think my views are selfish. 

Edited June 2 by YorkshireBlue

[Thor 2,380]

1 hour ago, YorkshireBlue said:

How is it selfish? His way of thinking is exactly that, he doesn't have to think about you or anybody else especially when it comes to anything political, if ppl don't like something, that's there problem not anybody else's, what's selfish is people ramming there beliefs political views and any other views down people's throats just because they don't agree.

This is my view

Politics is a waste of time it's all corrupt 

There are only 2 genders 

Religion is the number 1 reason for all wars and it's all bollocks 

White American college students are the dumbest MFs  currently on the planet 

I honestly couldn't give 2 wanks if u think my views are selfish. 

The one with reasonable views on our Chelsea team also has the most reasonable life views. Not shocked tbh.

[robsblubot 3,464]

7 hours ago, YorkshireBlue said:

How is it selfish? His way of thinking is exactly that, he doesn't have to think about you or anybody else especially when it comes to anything political, if ppl don't like something, that's there problem not anybody else's, what's selfish is people ramming there beliefs political views and any other views down people's throats just because they don't agree.

This is my view

Politics is a waste of time it's all corrupt 

There are only 2 genders 

Religion is the number 1 reason for all wars and it's all bollocks 

White American college students are the dumbest MFs  currently on the planet 

I honestly couldn't give 2 wanks if u think my views are selfish. 

You just described a selfish point of view: as long as things are going well for me, my fellow countrymen can screw themselves. Human beings live in a society for a reason.
"waste of time they are all corrupt" really makes the job of corrupt politicians a lot easier. Some of them are indeed corrupt, and it is our job, the ones who elect them to hold them accountable, because evidently no one else will.

I mostly agree with your other points, so not really sure how they relate. 🙂

Yes, selfish views are usually unapologetic for some strange reason.
There was a time I thought exactly the same. In the end of the day tho, we still live in that same society, and the decisions made by these politicians can directly affect your life. Taxes, laws, wars... they all can.

Regarding the discussion in itself, the weird part is coming to "Politics & Stuff" and complaining that people are discussing "Politics & Stuff". 🤷‍♂️

[cosmicway 1,299]

1 hour ago, robsblubot said:

You just described a selfish point of view: as long as things are going well for me, my fellow countrymen can screw themselves. Human beings live in a society for a reason.
"waste of time they are all corrupt" really makes the job of corrupt politicians a lot easier. Some of them are indeed corrupt, and it is our job, the ones who elect them to hold them accountable, because evidently no one else will.

I mostly agree with your other points, so not really sure how they relate. 🙂

Yes, selfish views are usually unapologetic for some strange reason.
There was a time I thought exactly the same. In the end of the day tho, we still live in that same society, and the decisions made by these politicians can directly affect your life. Taxes, laws, wars... they all can.

Regarding the discussion in itself, the weird part is coming to "Politics & Stuff" and complaining that people are discussing "Politics & Stuff". 🤷‍♂️

You cannot beat corruption whatever you do or say.
In fact there exist dictatorships under parliamentary cloak all over the place.
But to change those with the original dictatorships is hardly recomended.
It would be like throwing your old car over a cliff because it is old and walk the rest of the 500 miles to the nearest civilization.

As for me all I can expect from the government is ... not to allow Erdogan reach the outskirts of Athens, the toll boths.
Nothing else and that may be too much.
I realise of course that all political parties have numerous cronies ready to jump into the gravy train and they do.

Tell me this:
How much does it cost to install a voting website ?
The voting could be about anything, for example "who do you fancy as the next Chelsea manager Maresca, Zerbi or Mc Kenna".
To vote you have to go to a local office where they are logged in to the website and you can vote.
So you don't vote twice you are logged out from the voter's page after you place your vote and the operator in the next room has to login again for the next customer.
Your vote is transmitted via the internet to some other url where all the votes are added and the partial sums are displayed.
If this cannot be done with freebies tell me someone how much it would cost.

Edited June 2 by cosmicway

[robsblubot 3,464]

26 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

You cannot beat corruption whatever you do or say.
In fact there exist dictatorships under parliamentary cloak all over the place.
But to change those with the original dictatorships is hardly recomended.
It would be like throwing your old car over a cliff because it is old and walk the rest of the 500 miles to the nearest civilization.

As for me all I can expect from the government is ... not to allow Erdogan reach the outskirts of Athens, the toll boths.
Nothing else and that may be too much.
I realise of course that all political parties have numerous cronies ready to jump into the gravy train and they do.

Tell me this:
How much does it cost to install a voting website ?
The voting could be about anything, for example "who do you fancy as the next Chelsea manager Maresca, Zerbi or Mc Kenna".
To vote you have to go to a local office where they are logged in to the website and you can vote.
So you don't vote twice you are logged out from the voter's page after you place your vote and the operator in the next room has to login again for the next customer.
Your vote is transmitted via the internet to some other url where all the votes are added and the partial sums are displayed.
If this cannot be done with freebies tell me someone how much it would cost.

In engineering we know that no system is perfect. This is obvious to any engineer, because we deal with tradeoffs in a daily basis. And yet the majority of the population expect systems, like the Electoral system or the Political system, to be perfect.

That's very silly IMO. We do the best we can, and try to minimize the corruption in politics by eliminating the people who abuse the system. Which is what some of us here say about trump, as there have been few politicians in the US (yes he is very much one) who abused the system like he did and does.

Yeah "voting website" or voting local office, does not mean anything to me, so can't comment. I'm very familia with security in computer systems given that's part of my work. There very good mechanisms to verify identify, many of which are used when you make online purchases, and they work very well, evidently.

BTW, the US elections are manual -- there are no electronic ballots given those fears.

[Clockwork 1,794]

9 hours ago, YorkshireBlue said:

How is it selfish? His way of thinking is exactly that, he doesn't have to think about you or anybody else especially when it comes to anything political, if ppl don't like something, that's there problem not anybody else's, what's selfish is people ramming there beliefs political views and any other views down people's throats just because they don't agree.

This is my view

Politics is a waste of time it's all corrupt 

There are only 2 genders 

Religion is the number 1 reason for all wars and it's all bollocks 

White American college students are the dumbest MFs  currently on the planet 

I honestly couldn't give 2 wanks if u think my views are selfish. 

This is false, humans are tribal, religion is another manifestation of it. Even without religion people will look for another tribe to engrain themselves into. The concept of country would still exist. Religion one of the symptoms, not the cause. Land and resources is the number 1 reason. I would argue religion has probably lowered wars.

Every war is the same, it is the same tribal warfare that has been fought since the beginning. Wars been fought for the purpose and benefit of tribal leaders kings, emperors, president, elites, etc and those that actually do the fighting have always been those that are lower in the pyramid of social hierarchy and they don't reap the benefit of the wars.

Remove the names, countries, religion, ethnicity, etc you would see it is the same tribal wars. 

If you think about it football is another manifestation of tribes, thankfully it is a non violent form. 

[Fulham Broadway 16,705]

24 minutes ago, Clockwork said:

Land and resources is the number 1 reason.

There is also a very strong profit motive in war. The billionaires and shareholders of #1 export in the World need to ensure their products are used. Their media billionaire mates cooperate by letting everyone know ''the world is a dangerous place and you need to be scared''. 

[robsblubot 3,464]

43 minutes ago, Clockwork said:

This is false, humans are tribal, religion is another manifestation of it. Even without religion people will look for another tribe to engrain themselves into. The concept of country would still exist. Religion one of the symptoms, not the cause. Land and resources is the number 1 reason. I would argue religion has probably lowered wars.

Every war is the same, it is the same tribal warfare that has been fought since the beginning. Wars been fought for the purpose and benefit of tribal leaders kings, emperors, president, elites, etc and those that actually do the fighting have always been those that are lower in the pyramid of social hierarchy and they don't reap the benefit of the wars.

Remove the names, countries, religion, ethnicity, etc you would see it is the same tribal wars. 

If you think about it football is another manifestation of tribes, thankfully it is a non violent form. 

Good post.

Not sure I agree that religion plays a lesser part in wars, but do agree with the rest. Also that we'd find other ways to wage wars as well, as we have in the past. They would be prob smaller in scale tho:
Yuval Noah Harari wrote in Sapiens something like (haven't found the exact quote) that religion is the most effective way to make people who have little in common, and don't even live near each other, fight for the same cause in a war.
In short, religion can increase the number of people involved in wars in a drastic way.

Edited June 2 by robsblubot

[YorkshireBlue 3,118]

1 hour ago, Clockwork said:

This is false, humans are tribal, religion is another manifestation of it. Even without religion people will look for another tribe to engrain themselves into. The concept of country would still exist. Religion one of the symptoms, not the cause. Land and resources is the number 1 reason. I would argue religion has probably lowered wars.

Every war is the same, it is the same tribal warfare that has been fought since the beginning. Wars been fought for the purpose and benefit of tribal leaders kings, emperors, president, elites, etc and those that actually do the fighting have always been those that are lower in the pyramid of social hierarchy and they don't reap the benefit of the wars.

Remove the names, countries, religion, ethnicity, etc you would see it is the same tribal wars. 

If you think about it football is another manifestation of tribes, thankfully it is a non violent form. 

Wars are fought for land and what ever else you said, but in the name or religion, when people are bombing arenas in the name of a god, that's an act of terrorism in the name of religion or how they see the religion, ww2 Hitler went after a certain religion and killed as many as he could, land is a profit of war but not always the reason.

[YorkshireBlue 3,118]

1 hour ago, robsblubot said:

In engineering we know that no system is perfect. This is obvious to any engineer, because we deal with tradeoffs in a daily basis. And yet the majority of the population expect systems, like the Electoral system or the Political system, to be perfect.

That's very silly IMO. We do the best we can, and try to minimize the corruption in politics by eliminating the people who abuse the system. Which is what some of us here say about trump, as there have been few politicians in the US (yes he is very much one) who abused the system like he did and does.

Yeah "voting website" or voting local office, does not mean anything to me, so can't comment. I'm very familia with security in computer systems given that's part of my work. There very good mechanisms to verify identify, many of which are used when you make online purchases, and they work very well, evidently.

BTW, the US elections are manual -- there are no electronic ballots given those fears.

If you eliminated everyone who abused the system there would be no one left, and no normal person expects the system to be perfect.. far from it! What we expect is if you say something fucking do it! End of, also on another posted you replied to saying it's selfish because of taxes etc, it's non of my business what taxes you pay and it's not for me to vote in such away that helps you with your taxes..... I'll vote for who I want because I want to, not because bob down the road might get 10% extra on his benefits or are Linda can pay 2% less tax, there problems are fuck all to do with me. Call that selfish all you want but I look after my family and do what's best for them, because no one else will, so again I ask why should I care what taxes ppl pay?   

[robsblubot 3,464]

54 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

If you eliminated everyone who abused the system there would be no one left, and no normal person expects the system to be perfect.. far from it! What we expect is if you say something fucking do it! End of, also on another posted you replied to saying it's selfish because of taxes etc, it's non of my business what taxes you pay and it's not for me to vote in such away that helps you with your taxes..... I'll vote for who I want because I want to, not because bob down the road might get 10% extra on his benefits or are Linda can pay 2% less tax, there problems are fuck all to do with me. Call that selfish all you want but I look after my family and do what's best for them, because no one else will, so again I ask why should I care what taxes ppl pay?   

Probably, but again, we do the best we can not to end up with Hitler as commander in chief. It's NOT a binary choice here: there are quite distinct levels of abuse.
Some people do conflate fraud with mass fraud, for example. It's incredibly more difficult to spot and prevent small things, but it gets easier when it's done in large scale: applies to much of crime in general.

Regarding taxes, you do tho. We do have control over that at local and federal level. It depends which party we elect and the the policies behind that.
I don't care too much myself as I have the luxury to not care, but I can certainly emphasize with colleagues and friends if they feel otherwise.

Edited June 2 by robsblubot