• Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    7 months ago

    Did you actually read what you posted? It specifically says she voted against it because it only cut off defensive (ant-missile) armaments while still allowing offensive weapons. Pretty much the opposite of your headline.

    • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      There’s really no difference between “offensive” and “defensive” weapons. Israel was able to start a war with Iran precisely because they knew they would be protected by the “defensive” anti-missile systems provided by the US, and from US assets directly shooting down Iranian missiles on their way to Israel. Weapons are weapons. Don’t fall or the marketing.

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      7 months ago

      So she wants to make sure the Israeli military bases which bomb Gaza every day cannot be retaliated against.

      • suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        If there is truly no difference, then only disallowing some munitions is a completely useless gesture.

          • suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            Your assertion is that there is no distinction between offensive and defensive weapons. If that is true then any allowance of any weapons is a continued support of genocide. Another way: any bill that still allows some weapon types is functionally useless at preventing genocide.

            • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              7 months ago

              Yes which is why AOC should have voted for the amendment to not send weapons to Israel. That is kind of the point here.

              • suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                7 months ago

                Yes which is why AOC should have voted for the amendment to not send weapons to Israel

                Except that’s not what the amendment did, it only stopped some money for a portion of particular types of weapons.

                • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Yes and AOC voted against that and said she did it because she supports sending weapons to Israel. Which is what she says in the tweet

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    7 months ago

    The minute amount of hope I had left for AOC is gone. This woman is not a progressive. She is an establishment ghoul.

    • appropriateghost@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      anyone who can change their views about a politician should be commended, so i appreciate this.

      it’s truly a shame because i know people who are supporting AOC are generally good people who want to see real change.

  • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    7 months ago

    Before any moron comes in to defend sending interceptors to Nazi Germany:

    There is no difference between offensive and “defensive” weapons in international law.

      • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Nah, just the replacement for Kibuts Bernie, he can go full mask off zionist now he’s on his way out.
        Unfortunately for her it’s a bad start since every now and then they have to vote and put their cards on the table.
        This is already such a time. You can see she talks the talk but doesn’t walk the walk.
        A classic politician.