You're viewing part of a thread.
If you won’t reward your dog for doing a little trick, how’s it going to learn to do a big one?
The actual analogy here is that you're rewarding your dog for not doing any tricks, and expecting me to be so impressed by your ability to train your dog that I also decide to feed them treats for doing nothing
For a dog who's been trained for 50 years to support genocide, not supporting genocide is a pretty impressive trick. And Kamala doesn't support genocide. Doing nothing deserves a reward.
She's literally second in command for the administration wringing its hands about the bodies piling up but continuing to send weapons and aircraft carriers to protect the colonial occupiers.
Was dick cheney not part of the bush admins crimes?
The one 'anarchist' who has managed to talk themselves into supporting american war criminals
So this eventually boils down to : you're an american, so you are complicit too.
Which is not how it works (except in religious fanatism).
Was Dick Cheney complicit in Iraq /Afghanistan?
Im not playing degrees of Kevin bacon here, that's why so many people have been shouting at Democrats to dial back the genocide, if they're towing the line they're complicit.
She's not first in command. I'd volunteer to be guilty by association too if it meant I could stop the funding of genocide when the 80 year old kicks the bucket. Who knows, maybe she's been slipping poison into his coffee. It's what I'd do.
So Dick Cheney not complicit in Iraq or Afghanistan at all? got it
Of course he's complicit, he had an active hand in starting both of those, which you're not going to be able to convince me Kamala had. The situations are entirely different, and you have to know the only connecting thread is the office, not anything that actually matters like their behavior.
But good try using a shit example to refute their point.
You seem to ascribe a lot to intent. Cheney participating in the Bush administrations wars lead to profiteering off a situation they created, Kamala is getting promoted for her complicity in the ongoing genocide to being the president herself.
I just can't take for granted that someone willing to be complicit in shit like that is going to suddenly have a change of heart once she's in charge.
You seem to ascribe a lot to intent.
Lol this is literal history friend. Or do you think it's a coincidence that he was also secretary of state during the first Iraq war? Or that he was directly responsible for the justification used for the second war, including the false narrative about WMDs? Just check his wiki of you don't believe me.
Crack a history book friend, you desperately need a refresher on this topic if you think I'm "ascribing intent" to one of the masterminds of the war on terror. But either way, your opinion is uninformed and worthless to me if you're ignorant to such basic facts.
way to write two paragraphs after desperately misinterpreting my first sentence. enjoy eating poop or whatever it is you do for fun
it's just too funny being like 'here's a wikipedia article educate yourself' after you failed to even follow my line of argumentation
I don't know who that is. I'm too young and too foreign to know all the American presidents
He was one of the architects of the War on Terror, and was the Secretary of State when the first Iraq war happened. Dude was literally one of the masterminds of this shit, so their comparison is just absolutely worthless.
Lmao but here you are browbeating people to vote for another American war criminal, deeply unserious