• sudo@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    76
    ·
    3 days ago

    Liberals, please stop with leading with the legal minutiae. Stop pretending that you would’ve been fine with this if only Trump had congressional approval. You know it’s just about oil and imperialism. Trump literally spelt it out for you. Stop censoring yourself because you think its “strategic”. Its not.

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      81
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Saying “Trump did X and broke the law doing it” is not the same thing as saying “This would be fine if Trump had done it through legal channels”.

      • sudo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        47
        ·
        3 days ago

        I literally said I know you oppose the action. Put that on the sign, its the most important thing.

        • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          3 days ago

          Maybe we’re reading things differently, but I thought their sign implied that fairly strongly, just that they wanted to tack “Trump is a criminal” onto that without drastically increasing the wording.

          • sudo@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            32
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Maybe that’s what they intended but I’ve noticed a trend of liberals immediately triangulating themselves into this “least-controversial” legalistic take because they don’t want to talk about Maduro. A stalinist waving a PSUV flag is more helpful at that point.

            I’m not accusing you in particular of this or OP for that matter.

            • tacosanonymous@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              30
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              Quit calling people you don’t know liberals. That’s a trend that needs to stop, comrade. Most of the people you say that shit to are on our side, they just don’t put the terms and thoughts together.

              Also, go complain to the protestors, or better yet, be at the protests.

              If you want real change, quit nitpicking people on lemmy.

              • MunkysUnkEnz0@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                15
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Yup, it’s divide and conquer technique… Same with boomers… lumping everyone over 45 into the boomer category, divide this again.

                They’ve done it with race, they’ve done it with politics, they’ve done it with age and sexual orientation.

                Now they’re working on male vs female… Toxic, masculinity trad wife.

                Its a class war 99 against 1 percent

              • knexcar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Isn’t everyone on this site a liberal though? I don’t think I’ve seen a single conservative on here.

                • tacosanonymous@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  This is part of the reason I told him to stop.

                  I’ll let you Google the definitions of things like liberal, neo-liberal, conservatism, etc. to boil it it down, they are mostly considered “right” ideologies based on capitalism and aren’t that far apart in a global context.

                  In American lexicon, yes liberal is left and conservative is right.

                  Edit: there are conservatives here. Not a lot but they have their own spaces.

                • mriormro@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Most people on most instances here I’ve encountered appear to be leftist more than liberal.

    • SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Maybe when conservatives stop playing “gotcha” games - attacking the absolute slightest imperfection in any liberal’s argument, all the while completely ignoring/blowing off the constant flat out blatant lies and lies of omission made by their so-called “leaders,” Maybe.

      • sudo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        3 days ago

        Why are you playing by conservative gotcha games then? Just say what you believe and say it as loud as you can. It is indeed a shouting match, not a debate.

        • SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          I prefer honest communication. Without that, there’s no point in saying/shouting anything at all. I prefer to waste my time in more satisfying ways.

          • sudo@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            3 days ago

            Protests are shouting matches. We’re not talking about general discussion. Do you censor yourself in general discussion because conservatives play gotcha games with you? How is that honest communication?

            • SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Protests can (and admittedly often do) devolve into shouting matches, but not necessarily. As I’ve aged I’ve reached the understanding that those never accomplish anything positive or useful. As such, I rarely bother anymore - if I go to a protest, I’m there simply to be counted as one of the (hopefully) many on that side of things. I do my best not to allow myself to be baited because it’s just so pointless.

              Do I censor myself? Maybe - if you consider choosing not to bother arguing a point because it seems likely that they’re not going to engage in good faith to be self-censoring. Otherwise, not really - I do try to consider my words carefully because there can be a LOT of logical steps to an argument that I don’t normally consciously think about as I likely reached my stance a LONG time ago and all that immediately comes to mind is my final conclusion.

              My life involved significant patches of effective solitude, and so I never really had to learn to argue my perspectives until I was old/mature enough to understand the importance of politics. Up until then, my thought processes were solely focused on determining the end result - the important things to remember. All the steps that got me to a final answer weren’t important enough to bother trying to remember because I usually didn’t need to recall them very often.

              Unfortunately, politics is ALL about arguing those individual steps before the final conclusion I reached, but my brain wasn’t trained during my lifetime to work that way - so I have to think out what I’m saying each time. It’s why I prefer this text-based type of social site - I can’t think on the spot quickly enough to do video, for example.

              So if you consider that to be self-censorship, well I disagree. I consider it making sure I’m communicating what I intend to effectively so that the conversation doesn’t get derailed too easily.

    • roastedpotato@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Fuck your congressional approval. Get a UN resolution. Nothing liberal about following international law.

      • FundMECFS@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Lmao international law and the UN was literally a Liberal Invention.

        If even they had UN approval the US shouldnt invade Venezuela.

        What matters first and foremost is the will of the people actually living in the country.

      • sad_detective_man@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Never stop pearl clutching when a bully does bully shit. More pink frogs holding signs about things they built their identity around not caring about plz

    • lzrSnap@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      If Trump felt beholden to congress, he would not have gotten approval. He would have had to spend years spreading propaganda and trying to build up a case, like Bush did. All that effort might have prevented him from doing it at all.

      More importantly, doing this is trying to peel off people who might waver because Maduro is unsympathetic. It highlights that yes, this is a dictatorship in the making.

      • sudo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        If Trump felt beholden to congress, he would not have gotten approval. He would have had to spend years spreading propaganda and trying to build up a case, like Bush did. All that effort might have prevented him from doing it at all.

        Didn’t stop Bush did it?

        More importantly, doing this is trying to peel off people who might waver because Maduro is unsympathetic

        Saddam was even less sympathetic but the Iraq war was still wrong. Most of the US understands that. It’s bipartisan amongst the populace at this point. Call it Jungle Iraq. Your son is going to die for oil… again. That’ll alarm people way more than the bazillionth instance of presidential over-reach.

        • SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          3 days ago

          Bush had the “advantage” of 9/11 happening during his first year in office, shocking what was at the time still mostly a relatively sane country (compared to today). We were (theoretically) attacked first, so that gave DUHbya all sorts of popular support for a response in kind. Not the case here.

          You’re right regarding what people will actually care about, tho.