▲ 149 ▼ AOC voted against MTG’s amendment to strip Israel funding from the Defense Appropriations Act of 2026 (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml 140 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Doom@ttrpg.network -1 points 1 year ago (1 child) Okay. How does that lead to a solution? How does that not lead to more fighting and death? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] limer@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child) So, a knight with shield and armor is killing people. Take away his defenses and he kills less. Yes? When the casualty ratio is more than 1:1000 and the only reason it’s like that is because of the armor . Then helping repair the armor is a war crime. Also stationing a huge USA navy fleet next to Gaza to prevent any organized from reaching Gaza is a war crime too. Having them move away will reduce the loss of life and allow food to reach the area. The United States is totally complicit in this permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doom@ttrpg.network -2 points 1 year ago Except in your analogy there are no women or children or noncombatants. So you think it makes sense. But it's more like if you had an army of knights vs an army of peasants but both armies had babies tied to them and your goal is to stop the baby killing. Removing armor does nothing. The casualty ratio is because it's specifically not a war. Israel claiming it is a war is part of their push. I know you know that though. So why didn't MTG try to pass legislation to remove that fleet? Because that wasn't her goal. Instead she managed to sow more division and get nothing done while stroking you all and making you feel justified and giving you a place to put your anger. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] limer@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (1 child) So, a knight with shield and armor is killing people. Take away his defenses and he kills less. Yes? When the casualty ratio is more than 1:1000 and the only reason it’s like that is because of the armor . Then helping repair the armor is a war crime. Also stationing a huge USA navy fleet next to Gaza to prevent any organized from reaching Gaza is a war crime too. Having them move away will reduce the loss of life and allow food to reach the area. The United States is totally complicit in this permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doom@ttrpg.network -2 points 1 year ago Except in your analogy there are no women or children or noncombatants. So you think it makes sense. But it's more like if you had an army of knights vs an army of peasants but both armies had babies tied to them and your goal is to stop the baby killing. Removing armor does nothing. The casualty ratio is because it's specifically not a war. Israel claiming it is a war is part of their push. I know you know that though. So why didn't MTG try to pass legislation to remove that fleet? Because that wasn't her goal. Instead she managed to sow more division and get nothing done while stroking you all and making you feel justified and giving you a place to put your anger. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doom@ttrpg.network -2 points 1 year ago Except in your analogy there are no women or children or noncombatants. So you think it makes sense. But it's more like if you had an army of knights vs an army of peasants but both armies had babies tied to them and your goal is to stop the baby killing. Removing armor does nothing. The casualty ratio is because it's specifically not a war. Israel claiming it is a war is part of their push. I know you know that though. So why didn't MTG try to pass legislation to remove that fleet? Because that wasn't her goal. Instead she managed to sow more division and get nothing done while stroking you all and making you feel justified and giving you a place to put your anger. permalink fedilink source parent