Across the political spectrum, Americans want to end the genocide in Gaza and stop enabling Netanyahu's war crimes — but will the US Government listen?
Thanks so much for this excellent article. I just sent it to Kamala Harris at the WH, with a letter begging her to consider an arms embargo. Let's hope someone gets it to her!
have you taken a poll to discover how Americans feel about Hamas building tunnels instead of feeding the hungry people in Gaza? How do Americans feel about Gazans and Hamas taking Americans as captives? To elicit followers be honest. Americans do not like aggressors who blame others. Americans do not like 'cry babies' who attack a person and plead for them not to hit back.
thx for your writing. it seems from the cnn press conference that as president, VP will Not be reducing munitions. i understand i need to vote for Democracy, and i will. (this will not be the first time i have to ‘settle’.) while many comprehend this is almost ninety-five years, especially since 1948 and many episodes, how can true history, of ‘america’ and global be brought forward and particularly to those who get to make decisions for this nation?
Hamas murdered, raped, beheaded ...the list goes on. Even Americans were not spared. And you condone these actions? Harris wants to avenge the deaths of the innocent children and raped women - who will do the avenging?
Personally I don't put a lot of stock in these types of polls. If the question asked is, 'do you support continuing to give weapons to Israel to continue its genocide in Gaza', of course it gets mostly no. If the question is, 'do you support helping Israel defend itself against terrorist attacks such as what occurred last Oct. 7th' it'll get a lot of yes. So it's easy for a pollster to manipulate the numbers.
I'm not sure why you're saying that here or what that has to do with what I just wrote about polling. I also don't know where this information comes from. What to one person is a kidnapping is to another person an arrest, one person calls a hostage is from another vantage point someone who has been arrested for a crime, and what one person thinks is Palestinian land another thinks is not. You might also mention the countless missiles Hamas fired at Israeli civilians leading up to the 10/7 attack and the countless terrorist attacks they've been responsible for. My main thought, though, is that it is not helpful to endlessly argue about the past, who was right or who was wrong, or who has been worse than who. What's important is to look for a solution that best safeguards the rights of all the people living in Israel and the Palestinian territories now and into the future.
Opposition to genocidal war crimes committed by the apartheid state of Israel is good policy and politics. Kamala Harris with over $500 million in her campaign war chest is more than able to turn her back on the Israel Lobby if she chooses to do so. Not doing so could cost her the election so unless she is a true believer in the Netanyahu Narrative like Joe Biden, she has no reason to continue supporting Israel's war efforts. I don't think she is ideologically bigoted against Palestinians like Joe Biden, I think she is supporting the establishment DNC talking points thinking it is good politics. I hope more reasonable voices showing the actual public polling gets into her inner circle.
In my last post I described the actions I would like to see her take;
"If Kamala Harris is able to come out and say ‘Look Israel is not the vibrant democracy which respects human rights like we thought it was and right now religious fundamentalists in that nation are committing genocidal war crimes so America can no longer be complicit,’ that's a message that will earn back my vote. Kamala needs to clarify a new approach different from Biden's by vowing to cut off offensive military weapons to Israel until they;
- Commit to a 2 state solution
- End their use of starvation as a weapon of war
- End their indiscriminate bombing of Gaza
- End their aggression against other nations in the region
- Turn over Israeli war criminals to the ICC
-Pay reparations to Palestinians as the ICJ ordered
-And end their apartheid occupation of illegally annexed Palestinian territory"
There are a few problems with this post. First, the person who is approving arming Israel is not running for office. So he has a reason not to care what Americans think. Second, even if he's trying to work in concert with the person who is running for the office he's no longer seeking, it takes very large amounts of money (a problem in itself) to run for office, and much more money flows from military contractors than comes from holding office. And third, there's no difference between the candidates in terms of supplying Israel.
Your argument, of course, is that a candidate is more likely to win (votes) if they don't supply Israel, but to take that position during a campaign means the spigot gets shut off, leading to a campaign disadvantage. (They want all that money for some reason.) And they don't want the spigot to get shut off.
Where this leaves us is with the tragic reality that the public/voters are not the primary constituents of electeds, The larger donors are.
"And yes, as Vice President, Harris does not have the authority to unilaterally end arms to Netanyahu just yet. But that’s true of most any policy too. For example, Harris also does not have unilateral authority to pass legislation to protect reproductive rights. However, I am grateful that she’s been unapologetic about pushing for legislation to protect reproductive rights when elected President. She’s doing so because it is the moral, legal, and politically right thing to do. Harris can employ the same future vision about ending arms to Netanyahu. Doing so would demonstrate to the American people that she hears them and is responsive to them."
Vice president Harris's policy on Reproductive Rights and abortion rights does not contradict President Biden's policy. For her to come out and say we should stop sending weapons to Israel would outright contradict his policy and state that his policy is wrong and that he should change his policy. I don't think I've ever seen a sitting vice president come out in public and declare that the presidents foreign policy is wrong and he should adopt an opposite policy.
She's been unapologetic in her advocacy for reproductive rights, most Americans and most of the world community want to stop arming Netanyahu, we have every political reason to assume that if Harris feels a certain way about arming Netanyahu, and Biden feels differently, he would adjust his approach to help her get elected, but still, she doesn't make any statement, even including that she would like to see a more open and inclusive convention, in which a Palestinian could do no more than speak.
Either she approves of what Biden is doing, or she's paralyzed. If the latter, paralyzed by what?
I disagree that Biden would neccessarily change his foreign policy regarding sending weapons to Isreal in order to help Harris get elected simply on the basis that she had a different view on the issue. So far he has not been listening to the fact that American public opinion supports an arms embargo so I don't think he would change that to help her get elected if he wouldn't change it to help himself get elected.
It's such a glaringly conspicuous issue that 1) she would say something without being asked, and 2) she would avoid answering if she was asked.
By the way, when Qasim says "just yet," it should not be forgotten that every day and every hour and every minute that someone doesn't cut Netanyahu off, more entirely innocent Palestinian men, women, children, and babies, and aid workers, and journalists get killed. Netanyahu relies on that delay to increase the damage done in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, all thanks to good old us.
Understood. However, the question remains. Also, would Congress override the President and send weapons anyway? I believe the best thing to do is simply ask her about it. I know that is what I would do if I had the opportunity.
I would, too. I've been waiting by the phone all day for a call from her, but she must be busy with something.
Interestingly, William Sanchez lists what Harris would have to do to win back his vote. I wonder for whom he's planning to vote instead. Unfortunately, any vote not for Harris or Trump is for the other. Mr Sanchez must realize that Trump is worse than the Harris who frustrates and disappoints him.
Qasim, this is of course an excellent article. The question I have is " why does Biden continue this horrible policy after so many months of clear information showing that most Americans oppose it; that Netanyahu appears to continue the Gaza war and move towards broader regional war to avoid facing legal charges"? Could it be that AIPAC money and political influence is that important to the Democrat campaign??? The Democrat presidential campaign is clearly a balancing act; not enough people know about Project 2025, republicans are purgng voter rolls, and of course attacking the Harris/Walz campaign with vicious lies. So the question... is this about campaign funds?
It depends what you mean by support for Israel. This country has always supported Israel. For a while, that was the right thing to do. But what if Israel is now on an illegal crusade intended to colonialize all the land "from the River to the Sea," and to annihilate as many innocents as possible in the crusade? Is that the "right thing" to support? Keep in mind that someone asked Biden not long ago if he would pardon his own convicted son, which he has the power to do. He said he would not. So he has an at least rudimentary concept of right and wrong.
I think it's glib and unfair of you simply to accept Biden's support of Netanyahu as a "logical conclusion" and "the right thing to do."
I don't know why Biden is doing this. He's long done this. Jewish historian and scholar Peter Beinart wrote an excellent piece in 2020 citing Biden's extreme right stance on Israel and how he harmed the peace process under Obama. Regarding campaign cash, the Harris/Walz campaign has set records on fundraising, so I don't think that's it. A Democratic win will depend on turnout, and ending arms to Netanyahu will increase turnout in ways few other things can.
Agree that ending arms to N, placing conditions on arms, i.e. none for war in Gaza or West Bank, would increase turnout and save election from an Uncommitted boycott. Thx for reference on Beinart article. Biden has supported some bad causes/decisions, e.g. appointing Thomas to Supreme Court, supporting Clintons building of federal prisons... and he can be hard-headed/stubborn. I hope that Kamala will be able to state a position now that at least signals intention to put conditions on arms to Israel. Right now, seems like N is pushing hard for expanded war, maybe intentionally before the election... Yikes!
Intend to send a copy of Amy Goodman's interview with Palestinian health workers about the torture of these health workers in Israeli prisons to both Biden and Harris. Support for Israeli defense is one thing, the Israeli clear deliberate attacks on Palestinians is another.
Thanks so much for this excellent article. I just sent it to Kamala Harris at the WH, with a letter begging her to consider an arms embargo. Let's hope someone gets it to her!
one spigot🚰 ✋...
another 🇵🇸 spigot opens
I reject in it for the💰
And put Netanyahu on trial at The Hague.
‘Of the people, for the people’ is just a myth. Our government is owned by corporations and Israel.
have you taken a poll to discover how Americans feel about Hamas building tunnels instead of feeding the hungry people in Gaza? How do Americans feel about Gazans and Hamas taking Americans as captives? To elicit followers be honest. Americans do not like aggressors who blame others. Americans do not like 'cry babies' who attack a person and plead for them not to hit back.
Great article but will Harris ride this wave to victory?
thx for your writing. it seems from the cnn press conference that as president, VP will Not be reducing munitions. i understand i need to vote for Democracy, and i will. (this will not be the first time i have to ‘settle’.) while many comprehend this is almost ninety-five years, especially since 1948 and many episodes, how can true history, of ‘america’ and global be brought forward and particularly to those who get to make decisions for this nation?
Any thoughts about why Harris is moving in exactly the wrong direction as far as committing to give Israel unconditional military aid?
Is it AIPAC?? What the heck is going on?
Hamas murdered, raped, beheaded ...the list goes on. Even Americans were not spared. And you condone these actions? Harris wants to avenge the deaths of the innocent children and raped women - who will do the avenging?
Personally I don't put a lot of stock in these types of polls. If the question asked is, 'do you support continuing to give weapons to Israel to continue its genocide in Gaza', of course it gets mostly no. If the question is, 'do you support helping Israel defend itself against terrorist attacks such as what occurred last Oct. 7th' it'll get a lot of yes. So it's easy for a pollster to manipulate the numbers.
... agree absolutely
polls generally reflect bias:
• obvious dem polled me
" IF THE CHOICE IS
VOTE FOR A CONVICT
OR A VOTING RIGHTS
ADVOCATE...." duh🤔
I'm not sure why you're saying that here or what that has to do with what I just wrote about polling. I also don't know where this information comes from. What to one person is a kidnapping is to another person an arrest, one person calls a hostage is from another vantage point someone who has been arrested for a crime, and what one person thinks is Palestinian land another thinks is not. You might also mention the countless missiles Hamas fired at Israeli civilians leading up to the 10/7 attack and the countless terrorist attacks they've been responsible for. My main thought, though, is that it is not helpful to endlessly argue about the past, who was right or who was wrong, or who has been worse than who. What's important is to look for a solution that best safeguards the rights of all the people living in Israel and the Palestinian territories now and into the future.
Empire cares not a whit about polling, about anything other than its own imperatives.........
...thank 👉 you ! for your excellent summation of all
i need to push to the campaign committee & dnc !
Great post.
Opposition to genocidal war crimes committed by the apartheid state of Israel is good policy and politics. Kamala Harris with over $500 million in her campaign war chest is more than able to turn her back on the Israel Lobby if she chooses to do so. Not doing so could cost her the election so unless she is a true believer in the Netanyahu Narrative like Joe Biden, she has no reason to continue supporting Israel's war efforts. I don't think she is ideologically bigoted against Palestinians like Joe Biden, I think she is supporting the establishment DNC talking points thinking it is good politics. I hope more reasonable voices showing the actual public polling gets into her inner circle.
I hope she turns her back. I hope she agrees with you that she doesn't need more (AIPAC, for example) money.
I wish she could read this post. It would give her confidence.
Most women have a greater capacity for empathy than do most men. That's why "god" created maternal instincts.
I agree I think she has more empathy than Biden, but we really need to see action. It's what the American people want.
Agreed
In my last post I described the actions I would like to see her take;
"If Kamala Harris is able to come out and say ‘Look Israel is not the vibrant democracy which respects human rights like we thought it was and right now religious fundamentalists in that nation are committing genocidal war crimes so America can no longer be complicit,’ that's a message that will earn back my vote. Kamala needs to clarify a new approach different from Biden's by vowing to cut off offensive military weapons to Israel until they;
- Commit to a 2 state solution
- End their use of starvation as a weapon of war
- End their indiscriminate bombing of Gaza
- End their aggression against other nations in the region
- Turn over Israeli war criminals to the ICC
-Pay reparations to Palestinians as the ICJ ordered
-And end their apartheid occupation of illegally annexed Palestinian territory"
The question, Mr Sanchez, is why she hasn't said any of that yet.
There are a few problems with this post. First, the person who is approving arming Israel is not running for office. So he has a reason not to care what Americans think. Second, even if he's trying to work in concert with the person who is running for the office he's no longer seeking, it takes very large amounts of money (a problem in itself) to run for office, and much more money flows from military contractors than comes from holding office. And third, there's no difference between the candidates in terms of supplying Israel.
Your argument, of course, is that a candidate is more likely to win (votes) if they don't supply Israel, but to take that position during a campaign means the spigot gets shut off, leading to a campaign disadvantage. (They want all that money for some reason.) And they don't want the spigot to get shut off.
Where this leaves us is with the tragic reality that the public/voters are not the primary constituents of electeds, The larger donors are.
I addressed your argument in the article:
"And yes, as Vice President, Harris does not have the authority to unilaterally end arms to Netanyahu just yet. But that’s true of most any policy too. For example, Harris also does not have unilateral authority to pass legislation to protect reproductive rights. However, I am grateful that she’s been unapologetic about pushing for legislation to protect reproductive rights when elected President. She’s doing so because it is the moral, legal, and politically right thing to do. Harris can employ the same future vision about ending arms to Netanyahu. Doing so would demonstrate to the American people that she hears them and is responsive to them."
Vice president Harris's policy on Reproductive Rights and abortion rights does not contradict President Biden's policy. For her to come out and say we should stop sending weapons to Israel would outright contradict his policy and state that his policy is wrong and that he should change his policy. I don't think I've ever seen a sitting vice president come out in public and declare that the presidents foreign policy is wrong and he should adopt an opposite policy.
Biden did exactly that under Obama, on the topic of Israel no less. Biden also did that under Obama on the topic of gay marriage.
She's been unapologetic in her advocacy for reproductive rights, most Americans and most of the world community want to stop arming Netanyahu, we have every political reason to assume that if Harris feels a certain way about arming Netanyahu, and Biden feels differently, he would adjust his approach to help her get elected, but still, she doesn't make any statement, even including that she would like to see a more open and inclusive convention, in which a Palestinian could do no more than speak.
Either she approves of what Biden is doing, or she's paralyzed. If the latter, paralyzed by what?
I disagree that Biden would neccessarily change his foreign policy regarding sending weapons to Isreal in order to help Harris get elected simply on the basis that she had a different view on the issue. So far he has not been listening to the fact that American public opinion supports an arms embargo so I don't think he would change that to help her get elected if he wouldn't change it to help himself get elected.
As it turns out, the speculation doesn't matter, since Harris now says Israel has her "ironclad" backing, too.
Either the Palestinians are going to get annihilated, or there's going to be a much larger Middle East war.
Maybe someone should ask her directly. By the was, I really appreciate your posts.
It's such a glaringly conspicuous issue that 1) she would say something without being asked, and 2) she would avoid answering if she was asked.
By the way, when Qasim says "just yet," it should not be forgotten that every day and every hour and every minute that someone doesn't cut Netanyahu off, more entirely innocent Palestinian men, women, children, and babies, and aid workers, and journalists get killed. Netanyahu relies on that delay to increase the damage done in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, all thanks to good old us.
Understood. However, the question remains. Also, would Congress override the President and send weapons anyway? I believe the best thing to do is simply ask her about it. I know that is what I would do if I had the opportunity.
I would, too. I've been waiting by the phone all day for a call from her, but she must be busy with something.
Interestingly, William Sanchez lists what Harris would have to do to win back his vote. I wonder for whom he's planning to vote instead. Unfortunately, any vote not for Harris or Trump is for the other. Mr Sanchez must realize that Trump is worse than the Harris who frustrates and disappoints him.
Qasim, this is of course an excellent article. The question I have is " why does Biden continue this horrible policy after so many months of clear information showing that most Americans oppose it; that Netanyahu appears to continue the Gaza war and move towards broader regional war to avoid facing legal charges"? Could it be that AIPAC money and political influence is that important to the Democrat campaign??? The Democrat presidential campaign is clearly a balancing act; not enough people know about Project 2025, republicans are purgng voter rolls, and of course attacking the Harris/Walz campaign with vicious lies. So the question... is this about campaign funds?
Perhaps the logical conclusion is that Joe Biden sincerely believes that support for Israel is the right thing to do.
It depends what you mean by support for Israel. This country has always supported Israel. For a while, that was the right thing to do. But what if Israel is now on an illegal crusade intended to colonialize all the land "from the River to the Sea," and to annihilate as many innocents as possible in the crusade? Is that the "right thing" to support? Keep in mind that someone asked Biden not long ago if he would pardon his own convicted son, which he has the power to do. He said he would not. So he has an at least rudimentary concept of right and wrong.
I think it's glib and unfair of you simply to accept Biden's support of Netanyahu as a "logical conclusion" and "the right thing to do."
Note Qasim's comment immediately below.
I don't know why Biden is doing this. He's long done this. Jewish historian and scholar Peter Beinart wrote an excellent piece in 2020 citing Biden's extreme right stance on Israel and how he harmed the peace process under Obama. Regarding campaign cash, the Harris/Walz campaign has set records on fundraising, so I don't think that's it. A Democratic win will depend on turnout, and ending arms to Netanyahu will increase turnout in ways few other things can.
Agree that ending arms to N, placing conditions on arms, i.e. none for war in Gaza or West Bank, would increase turnout and save election from an Uncommitted boycott. Thx for reference on Beinart article. Biden has supported some bad causes/decisions, e.g. appointing Thomas to Supreme Court, supporting Clintons building of federal prisons... and he can be hard-headed/stubborn. I hope that Kamala will be able to state a position now that at least signals intention to put conditions on arms to Israel. Right now, seems like N is pushing hard for expanded war, maybe intentionally before the election... Yikes!
Intend to send a copy of Amy Goodman's interview with Palestinian health workers about the torture of these health workers in Israeli prisons to both Biden and Harris. Support for Israeli defense is one thing, the Israeli clear deliberate attacks on Palestinians is another.
Beautifully argued. 👏👏
Thanks, Joe! I'm hopeful the administration listens to our collective voices.