It’s the first arms shipment to Israel to be announced by the administration since it put another arms transfer on hold earlier in the month.

The Biden administration has told key lawmakers it is sending a new package of more than $1 billion in arms and ammunition to Israel, three congressional aides said Tuesday.

It’s the first arms shipment to Israel to be announced by the administration since it put another arms transfer — consisting of 3,500 bombs — on hold this month. The administration has said it paused that earlier transfer to keep Israel from using the bombs in its growing offensive in the crowded southern Gaza city of Rafah.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldMEnglish
      72·
      7 months ago

      Please do not respond to multiple comments with the same post. That is essentially spamming, no matter how well-intentioned you are.

    • beardown@lemm.eeEnglish
      52·
      7 months ago

      Why should we believe that a more equitable voting system would solve this issue? Or any similar issues?

      To be sure, ranked choice voting would result in some improvements to the United States, and should be supported on that basis. But it would do nothing to modify the current structure wherein oligarchs rule the United States with impunity. It’s just that this would empower the neoliberal Democratic oligarchs rather than the fascist Republican oligarchs. Which is harm reduction and is therefore preferable, but is not a meaningful solution - especially to something as entrenched as Zionism

      • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
        51·
        7 months ago

        We would have to dismantle capitalism entirely and a huge cultural shift to fix that. Huge spending caps on campaigns would be a good start.

        RCV allows people to vote for candidates of a third party without wasting a vote like they would now. The problem is that much of society is brainwashed with red vs. blue politics and it would take a long time for everybody to get on the same page about a third party candidate.

        • beardown@lemm.eeEnglish
          4·
          6 months ago

          I agree.

          And, again, RCV and campaign finance reform would certainly be an improvement.

          But the root issue would remain untouched. And eventually, the ruling class would find ways to grossly manipulate that system to their own ends as well - or would gradually chip away at it through the judiciary that they control

          These proposals should be adopted nevertheless. But we should be clear-eyed about what they will and will not accomplish

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3·
        6 months ago

        Because the electoral and voting systems in the US are, respectively, intentionally undemocratic and extremely inconsistent depending on the state.

        RCV for national elections would materially address the former, and enforcing RCV as the system to use for all elections at all levels would materially address the latter.

        I am not claiming RCV (or any other similar/related system) would be a panacea, but it would be a damn sight better than the intentionally flawed shitshow we have to use now.

    • flames5123@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      6 months ago

      STAR voting is so much better than RCV. RCV is only marginally better than first past the post.

        • flames5123@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          6 months ago

          You can rank every candidate, so you can give multiple people 5’s. If you can’t decide between them. In RCV, if 51% vote #1 for candidate A, 49% vote #1 for candidate B, but 100% vote #2 for candidate C, the winner is still candidate A even though everyone voted for C. Everyone would’ve been a little satisfied. In STAR, if everyone put 4’s for C, they would win.

          • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            6 months ago

            Most people would still give A and B 5’s or 4’s, so C still loses even if they get all 4’s, no?

            • flames5123@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              6 months ago

              You total all of the points. So say 100 people with the 51/49 doing A/B at 5, and all 100 do C at 4. A would have 255 points, B would have 245 points, and C would have 400. C wins by a landslide.

              • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
                1·
                6 months ago

                Ah right assuming A and B are opposing candidates. Kind of a way to eliminate the most popular opposing candidates in a runoff assuming there is a middle of the road candidate that everybody likes.

                In RCV this might be translated differently tho. Maybe 26% vote C #1, 49% A #1, 25% B #1 with C #2, then in runoff, C would win.

                I don’t see everybody liking the same candidate for #2.

                • flames5123@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  1·
                  6 months ago

                  It’s more of an example how a more popular candidate can lose because RCV still depends on first past the post and isn’t that much better. It’s not translated by points. Everyone gets #1 first. If anyone has 51%, they win and we’re done. If no one has 51%, then we eliminate the least popular candidate, transferring the votes. This continues until one is at 51%. RCV is a bandaid.

                  Check out this CGP Grey video about RCV: https://youtu.be/3Y3jE3B8HsE

                  • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    2·
                    6 months ago

                    Is anybody using Star voting now? I just feel like it can be gamed. If you want your major candidate to win, you wouldn’t rank anybody else highly.

                    Thanks for the video. I totally agree that there are other voting systems like approval voting that may be better, but lots of traction with RCV already. Can be a stepping stone to other voting systems. Perfect is the enemy of good enough. Gotta take baby steps.