I would most assuredly vote for him. Could you imagine him giving a state of the union address in a Carhartt hoodie.
People have weird taste when it comes to charisma. Anyways hiding explosive devices on military personnel and waiting to detonate them once out in public amongst civilian life is a war crime. An American soldier having a hidden bomb detonate on them that was placed by some Russian spy while sipping coffee at a Starbucks and maming the barista next to him is a war crime. No one needs to respect Fetterman. We don't have to call him charismatic. He isn't. Not in any traditional sense. We post hoc label him charismatic to explain why someone like him against popularity because we get perplexed on how so we have to make up things like charisma. It's the same with Trump. Don't know what is charismatic about him. He sounds like any drunk uncle ranting. Also I find it off-putting that the first word that comes up to describe him dehumanizing the death of a child is "charisma".
It is like beauty - it is subjective, but people over a large group tend to be attracted to the same people more often than not. Charisma can also be circumstantial or cultural as well. I made no comment about Fetterman's position on Israel. I have in other threads - but I only said he was charismatic. Being charismatic doesn't mean he is more likely to be right or a good person. I never said anyone needed to respect Fetterman or his position. No - I have called him charismatic since the first time I saw the man, when he was obese and had only recently gotten involved in local politics. He stood out (for good or bad), and he resonated with people. He still does - he has a streak of populist appeal (which is dangerous). I can see why people like Trump. I personally do not find him appealing, nor do I find him to be a very good person. You are certainly entitled to that opinion - and I understand it. My response would be that I have posted numerous times about my feelings when it comes to the death of civilians in this conflict and the blatant dehumanization that is happening. Having said that - from a political stand point - not a moral one - but from a simple political point - he handled a very tough question very well. He was definitive in his position, he did not waiver from it, he acknowledged that it was sad - but then still circled the horses and stood by his convictions and maneuvered blame from his side to the other side. Fetterman is probably the most interesting Democrat in politics today - with tremendous upside because of his charisma, how he handles questions and his ability to think quickly on his feet. I do not agree with him on everything (including Israel) - but I have posted before about those concerns.
Yeah - he has tremendous appeal if he could ever get on a national stage. He has some of the political and social positions that the democrats have that many people find appealing, but he also does not come across as "better" than normal people - which a lot of Democrats and some Republican politicans suffer from. He would have some issues with some voting demographics, but has potential for very wide sided appeal.
No, sending explosives to terrorists is not a war crime. Dropping a 500 lb. bomb on them wouldn't be a war crime, let alone the tiny pager bombs. When you put your military assets in civilian areas, those civilian areas become fair game so long as the legitimate military objective is not outweighed by the civilian cost. When the entire enemy force is hiding among the civilian population, the only available choices are to not attack them at all, or to attack them among the civilian population. There is no statutory, treaty based, or customary rule of war that says you have to choose not to attack them at all (for blindingly obvious reasons). If these groups don't want their civilian populations to suffer (unfortunately, their entire strategy depends on the suffering of their civilian population, but just imagine they wanted to protect them), they would operate out of separate military facilities away from population centers.
So if some Muslim foreigner designates US military personnel as terrorists and implanted explosives in their phones and waited for them to detonate amongst civilian populations because militants regardless of region of the planet are about in civilian life outside their militant duties and some kids are maimed because their father who is a militant went to pick up their kids from school that day it wouldn't be terrorism? You want to attack bases sure. But every country has military personnel living amongst civilian populations when they are not on duty. And any normal person would consider planting explosives in devices carried by militants when they are about in their civilian life and waiting to detonate those devices amongst civilian populations as terrorism.
Apparently you missed the part where Hezballah doesn't have bases to attack and that not targeting them around civilians means not targeting them at all. As soon as the United States stops having military bases and stores their personnel and equipment in unmarked civilian areas, that will become a good counterargument. Right now, they can target Camp Pendelton, Fort Knox, or Andrews Air Force Base, etc.
I can guarantee you that eventually this back and forth will lead to you just admitting to "might makes right". So let's skip to that part.
I can guarantee that it will lead to you making idiotic reductive statements because everything has to be forced into an oppressor/oppressed narrative. Oops, too late. I'll give you another shot though, just pull up Google maps and circle a few of the major Hezballah bases that Israel should have targeted instead of doing the pager attack, then post it here.
Hamas and Hezbollah has justified attacks on Israeli civilians by saying that IDF soldiers mingle with the civilians population.
I think he’s already agreed to that since he’s frequently cited Rome’s destruction of Carthage as precedent for Israel’s actions.
Yes, just like Chowderhead did. Unfortunately for them, it is very easy to find IDF military bases that are legitimate targets. They attacked one of them on October 7th. Unfortunately they also attacked a music festival and several kibbutzim. You would think the communist would be in favor of protecting the kibbutzim, but alas. Yes, I did. As well as the US against Germany and Japan. Lasting peace is won through victory, not ceasefire agreements with people still trying to kill you.
^^^^^ This guy understands. Ceasefire=Reload and we will see you again in ten years. I'm not so gullible as to think there will not be smaller type terrorist attacks on Israel in the years to come. But, disable the big boy toys given by Iran and others and hopefully we won't see the night sky lit up as we do now almost daily. Less of that means less loss of life for BOTH SIDES. Will it happen, can it happen. The world can only hope.
Buddy a lot of the rockets launched at Israel from Gaza has pvc piping in their launcher. An estimated 20,000 children in Gaza have become orphaned this past year. There will be more terrorists unless you genocide. Do YOU understand?
Surely the Israeli children who got murdered by their daddies see it that way. The children of Nazis had to learn that their fathers were Nazis. Similarly, the children of Gaza need to no longer be indoctrinated by UNRWA/Hamas. That's the only way the cycle of violence will end.
