Reflecting on his presidency, Obama posed the question, “Well, was there something else I could have done?”

Former President Barack Obama cautioned against ignoring the complexities of the Israel-Hamas war, warning that “all of us are complicit.”

“If you want to solve the problem, then you have to take in the whole truth. And you then have to admit nobody’s hands are clean, that all of us are complicit to some degree,” he said in an excerpted interview with Pod Save America released Saturday.

            • CommanderM2192@lemmy.world
              71·
              1 year ago

              I wouldn’t personally know what a liberal thinks since I’m not a liberal (or conservative). But, it is an atrocity. Rich assholes like Zuckerberg are given free reign to continue taking ancestral lands from the tribes there. The people who had their land taken from them by conquerors should have the right to determine what to do with their ancestral land.

              Anyways, want to answer my question you racist shithead?

            • MonkeyBusiness@lemmy.one
              51·
              1 year ago

              Seems to me you only care about this conflict because it fits your worldview, as you clearly don’t care about a communist regime activity committing genocide on the Uighurs.

              If Israel was a communist country you’d be running over Palestinians with tank right now.

      • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
        1410·
        1 year ago

        Even if it was a misfired Palestinian rocket, which still isn’t proven btw, it doesn’t outweigh the 30+ hospitals that Israel has bombed to this day, or for that matter the fucking refugee camp they bombed last week.

        • mwguy@infosec.pub
          144·
          1 year ago

          I mean it does though because of the claim of 500 dead bodies that magically appeared and then (not a joke) dissolved like salt into water once it was clear it was IJ at fault and not the IDF.

          Israel has largely been pinpoint with its strikes and when you compare it’s released maps of Gaza’s tunnel networks from the last war with the BBC’s map of its airstrikes it’s very clear what they’re doing.

        • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
          103·
          1 year ago

          or for that matter the fucking refugee camp they bombed last week

          I was confused by this initially too (I read the headline and imagined a tent city for people fleeing this current war, but then the photo was of a city block with like 5 story buildings) but it’s only called a “refugee camp” because it was originally a site where refugees gathered after the 1948 war, in the modern day it’s more or less an urban neighborhood of Gaza with a population (at one point) of 100,000 just like any other part of the city

      • Lt_Cdr_Data@discuss.tchncs.de
        31·
        1 year ago

        I think hospital bombings on both sides must always be taken with a grain of salt… because if you are in a war and are highly unethical; where is the best place to operate a military base from, if you want to protect it from bombings?

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      2715·
      1 year ago

      Terrorists consider civilian casualties to be a scorecard. Hamas benefits when there’s Israeli civilian casualties. Hamas also benefits when there’s Palestinian civilian casualties.

      That’s the whole point of taking hostages isn’t it? To force Israel into a ground campaign which will cause Palestinian civilian casualties.

      The military forces of civilized nations don’t consider civilian casualties to be a victory no matter which side it’s on. They have an objective and need to achieve that objective while minimizing civilian casualties. The objective of the IDF is to free the hostages. They will make an effort to minimize civilian casualties. But they must achieve that objective even while know civilian causalities are a certainty even when they make an to keep those casualties to a minimum.

      This is the nature of war. And this is a war Hamas started. And remember there could be significantly fewer casualties (and a humanitarian ceasefire) if Hamas released the hostages.

      But they won’t do that because their objective is to maximize the number of Palestinian casualties because many people look at those casualties and become angry and want to support them.

      Netanyahu will lose power because of 1400 Israeli deaths. Both Israeli and Palestinian civilian casualties are considered to be a failure by Israelis.

      Both Israeli and Palestinian civilian casualties are considered a success by Hamas. They are psychopaths that know how people react to these numbers.

      • coffee_poops@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        219·
        1 year ago

        Constantly bombs refugee camps, schools, and hospitals This is just war, bro. Yeah we have the 4th most sophisticated and accurate military on earth but we just can’t help hitting civilians who just happen to be a minority in their own land…

        Dude, the logical hoops you’ll jump through to justify a genocide is extremely concerning.

        Holocaust scholars all over the world have even condemned the bloodshed.

        This isn’t the cost of war. It’s punishment. It’s imperialism.

      • jarfil@lemmy.world
        54·
        1 year ago

        The objective of the IDF is to free the hostages. They will make an effort to minimize civilian casualties.

        When a legitimate target is hiding among civilians, there are two possible responses:

        • Civilized nations: “F%ck, guess we’ll have to wait until they move”
        • Non-civilized nations: “Collateral damage”

        But they must achieve that objective even while know civilian causalities are a certainty

        No “buts”. Like it or not, defend it or not, that’s what non-civilized nations do.

    • AMillionNames@sh.itjust.works
      98·
      1 year ago

      But only because they are the ones in power. If the positions of power were reversed, it’d be pretty much the same thing, except Hamas would be the one performing the apartheid and the genocide.

  • TinyPizza@kbin.social
    15·
    1 year ago

    This is bad news for Israels current course of action. When the guy who was popular (enough that the current guy could “best friend” his coat tails into office) starts saying this stuff loud enough for everyone to hear, it’s intentional. This looks like more subtle public distancing and changing of narrative.

    The former president argued that it was important to acknowledge multiple seemingly contradictory truths: Hamas’ actions were “horrific,” but “the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians” were also “unbearable.”
    Obama previously spoke out on the conflict, saying in a statement that any actions by Israel that ignore the human cost of the war against Hamas “could ultimately backfire.”

    Israel and it’s supporters should be sobered by this soft diplomacy. It’s very much aimed at them and the timing should make it clear that they are being isolated.

  • spudwart@spudwart.comEnglish
    238·
    1 year ago

    “It’s complicated” is no excuse to be arming an already powerful nation with our tax dollars to make the situation more “complicated.”

    If it’s so damn complicated, maybe we shouldn’t be sending arms and tax dollars directly over to Israel, but rather send humanitarian aid to both sides instead.

    Taking a side in a complicated conflict of which many people don’t fully understand is an unwise decision, and using tax dollars to arm one or even both sides of a conflict we don’t fully understand is unethical.

    • bonus_crab@lemmy.world
      122·
      1 year ago

      Its their job to understand it, and they do. what they understand is that while supporting israel has a monetary cost , it secures our trade routes, which egypt has tried to close purely because ‘fuck you’ through the Mediterranean and puts pressure on the rest of the middle east to support the petrol dollar.

      If the arab countries were remotely as friendly as israel, itd diminish their value as an ally potentially to the extent that we wouldnt have to overlook the atrocities they commit. The reality is that ISIS and Hezbollah and Hamas are 100x worse. Ad soon as Iran gets nukes, theyre going to become another north korea, potentially a catalyst for WW3, and we need an ally in the region as leverage to prevent that.

      What this latest conflict has shown is that they will absolutely make suicidally stupid attacks that will result in massive casualties to their own people, so long as it advances their goal of genociding jews and anyone else thats not an arab.

      Say what you want about israel, but theyve been on the brink of kicking netanyahu and his racist ass out of office for years. Hes in a very similar situation legally to Trump. Hamas’s attack has virtually ensured that won’t happen now , as the nation enters a state of emergency, and theyve proved his fear mongering true.

  • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
    152·
    1 year ago

    Funny they never say this kinda shit or act upon it when they have any actual power. Like Eisenhower and his military industrial complex speech.

  • thecrotch@sh.itjust.works
    75·
    1 year ago

    Wow Barack “double Bush’s drone strikes, kill 12,000 Afghani civilians, and bomb a Doctor’s Without Boarders hospital” Obama wants to show restraint now that he’s no longer in a position to stop the bloodshed…

      • mommykink@lemmy.world
        51·
        1 year ago

        Don’t you know that criticizing Big Brother I mean The Government (when our guy is in charge) is basically letting Trump become president again?

          • mommykink@lemmy.world
            21·
            1 year ago

            (Ignore the fact that the most effective gun control legislation of the past decade was passed by the Trump administration)

            (Ignore the fact that Joe Biden was literally sold to us as the “Conservative democrat”)

            (Ignore the fact that Roe v. Wade was overturned with Democrats controlling the White House and Congress)

    • s_s@lemm.eeEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Normal in the modern era.

      In the 1800s they’d run as senators after their presidential terms if they were young enough.

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
        01·
        1 year ago

        In the 1800s running for Senate basically meant looking intimidatingly at the statehouse and daring them to explain to the voters why they said no to the former president from their state that those voters probably supported overwhelmingly

    • nicetriangle@kbin.social
      1·
      1 year ago

      Bush Sr certainly fell of the map and Carter basically went on to do a lot of charitable work but wasn’t particularly vocal in the media.

      • chaogomu@kbin.social
        1·
        1 year ago

        Bush Sr was spending most of his time in the 90s cultivating a close business relationship with the Saudis, particularly his fellow members of the Carlyle Group.

        Bush Sr was at the Annual Investor’s Conference on 9/11 where Shafiq bin Laden was the Guest of Honor.

  • ivanafterall@kbin.social
    13·
    1 year ago

    And you then have to admit nobody’s hands are clean, that all of us are complicit to some degree

    Nuh-uh. You are not dragging me into this shit. I didn’t want any of it!