this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2025
445 points (95.5% liked)

politics

24793 readers
2127 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“I think it’s going to require a little bit less navel-gazing and a little less whining and being in fetal positions. And it’s going to require Democrats to just toughen up,” Obama said at the fundraiser

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

150,000 deployed to 20,000. Less casualties on both sides. In a war he didn't start under a military industry that you're witnessing the power of in Israel. People think it's solely Israel holding everyone by the balls, learn about Krupp's impact on WWI.

Roll my fuckin eyes.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Well, I'm sure the dead kids that he bombed will be happy to hear that he killed less of them than the previous administration. What a relief!

[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Who is claiming that's okay though? And why are you acting like such a tool about it? You're literally treating it like Obama himself targeted kids. 150,000 to 20,000, both sides experience less casualties. That's a fantastic step up, Obama is correctly leading to a proper solution as best he can. Stop making human suffering a political bludgeoning instrument

The way you paint it, any war makes all combatants bad guys permanently and you're too immature to spot people trying in a fucked situation.. You can believe war is evil and bad and cruel but also be forced to engage in one.

Bush invaded and leveled a country to be unable to hold itself up. Obama chose to try and install support, that's what neoliberalism does. As much as you wanna believe it, he literally can't just sign a paper and magically make it all go away. He has to present a solution, criticize it and judge it all you want but calling him a warmonger and being so ignorant about the actual steps taken to reduce suffering is just stupid of you.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

lol, you are. You are literally saying he's not such a bad guy, because he killed less people.

I don't disagree that wars are sometimes a necessary evil, but that wasn't the case under Obama. He got into power, and continued on with Bush's policy of unnecessary war. He could have stopped, but he chose to continue.

You can keep saying that he had no power all you want, but he did, and you saying "nu-uh" doesn't change that fact.

[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I'm saying he deescalated a very awful military campaign that was branded "the war on terror" and was just one of many wars caused by intelligent agency bullshit when Obama was literally just of age to vote.

It's not a question of necessary evil it's a question of spinning plates. Stopping it too fast and it'll fall to the floor and all those children you use as an argument piece so fucking cruelly and stupidly go with it.

He had power. The president especially under Obama with such a hostile Congress/infrastructure around him cannot just declare the end of a war. Congress funds and declares war. The best Obama could do was deescalate, take action to reduce casualties and attempt to set up some sort of government he can even TRY to broker peace with.

And so he does that pretty well I believe and your ass is being a dick about it. Criticize all you want but do so correctly.

Scroll through this entire thread and look at how many morons are using words like warmonger and acting like he's the one killing kids. Then look at how fox news portrays Obama. You think they're not somewhat related?

Trump abolished the ability to know how many children he even bombed and Bush caused more destruction and death than Obama.

[–] piefood@feddit.online 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I never said he could just immediately stop the wars. And Trump and Bush being warmongers does not mean that Obama wasn't a warmonger. All three of them were warmongers.

If you can't defend your position, thats fine, but stop making up stuff that I never said.

He could have done a lot, but chose to make jokes about the people he killed. That doesn't sound like he tried very hard, especially when he continued torturing innocent people, and continued bombing kids.

[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 1 points 13 hours ago

I disagree Obama being a warmonger makes no sense. When Russia invaded Georgia and there was a push to go to war. Did we?