Salta al contenuto principale

in reply to geneva_convenience

Before any moron comes in to defend sending interceptors to Nazi Germany:

There is no difference between offensive and "defensive" weapons in international law.

in reply to geneva_convenience

Did you actually read what you posted? It specifically says she voted against it because it only cut off defensive (ant-missile) armaments while still allowing offensive weapons. Pretty much the opposite of your headline.
in reply to Boddhisatva

So she wants to make sure the Israeli military bases which bomb Gaza every day cannot be retaliated against.
Unknown parent

lemmy - Collegamento all'originale
geneva_convenience
What? This is about giving Israel 500 million dollars for free to purchase weapons with, by the way,
Unknown parent

lemmy - Collegamento all'originale
geneva_convenience
Yes which is why AOC should have voted for the amendment to not send weapons to Israel. That is kind of the point here.
Unknown parent

lemmy - Collegamento all'originale
geneva_convenience
Yes and AOC voted against that and said she did it because she supports sending weapons to Israel. Which is what she says in the tweet
Questa voce è stata modificata (1 mese fa)
Unknown parent

lemmy - Collegamento all'originale
geneva_convenience

You read a tweet full of lies and deception the likes only MAGA normally publishes

This is some trickle down economics level of "being anti war".