Yikes. Way to miss the point. I was laying out the unintended consequences of naive foreign policy, and your pointing to a list of people you think are naive enough to do it - and you seem to think that’s a good thing. Assuming you are right, they would be fucking over the Palestinians in order to be smugly pro-Palestine. Form over function and virtue signaling instead of getting to better outcomes are hallmarks of third party politics in this country.
The outcome of a policy isn’t irrelevant to a policy, it’s the whole point of the policy. I didn’t make a wild guess or rely on my own intuition. That scenario is one of several that foreign policy experts are warning against. The worst case is Iran getting actively involved, but that’s far less likely.
Howie wouldn’t support genocide. cornel west doesn’t support genocide. jill stein doesn’t support genocide.
there are always options.
Yikes. Way to miss the point. I was laying out the unintended consequences of naive foreign policy, and your pointing to a list of people you think are naive enough to do it - and you seem to think that’s a good thing. Assuming you are right, they would be fucking over the Palestinians in order to be smugly pro-Palestine. Form over function and virtue signaling instead of getting to better outcomes are hallmarks of third party politics in this country.
you are the one derailing the discussion about the actual policy of the candidates to make up stories about what you think would happen.
The outcome of a policy isn’t irrelevant to a policy, it’s the whole point of the policy. I didn’t make a wild guess or rely on my own intuition. That scenario is one of several that foreign policy experts are warning against. The worst case is Iran getting actively involved, but that’s far less likely.
let’s see any expert say what you said, and I’ll show you an Israeli shill
if you were as skilled at diplomacy as you’re pretending, you wouldn’t be wargaming here. you can’t know any better than I do what would happen.