Children killed in Lebanon as Israeli strikes hit homes far from front lines of war with Hezbollah

> Why hasn't the system been changed then? Who's going to change the system? > In a democracy, parties coalesce around ideologies that enjoy widespread support. The Republicans and Democrats are who they are because that's what their constituents voted for. This comes across as remarkably naïve. Campaign promises are not the same as what governance actually happens. The two sometimes align. They often don't. You need only to look at statistics for voter desires and what the government does. [62% of Americans think the federal government should ensure everyone has healthcare coverage.](https://news.gallup.com/poll/654101/health-coverage-government-responsibility.aspx) Does the federal government do that? No. Voter desires ≠ government policy. [60% of Americans think that gun purchase laws should be stricter.](https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx) Are the laws stricter? No. Voter desires ≠ government policy.

I’m completely serious. If you were an oligarch you would want conservative leaning people to be angry and resentful because these emotions make people motivated to vote. You would also want to make progressive leaning people cynical and apathetic, because these emotions make people less likely to vote. Conservative governments exist to transfer wealth to oligarchs. Oligarchs have the resources to create and propagate propaganda, and the idea that the Democrats are useless and / or corrupt serves their interests, which is why you see it everywhere. You might not be aware of it, but the billionaire assholes love it when you do their dirty work for them.

Does that make Gaza less bad due to Gaza's population rising since the start of it, where as in Ukraine their population has been greatly decreased?

Genocide is genocide. What use is going well ACKSHUALLY my genocide was worse

But my point is that depending on your frame of reference, whether one is worse than the other might change. In terms of scale, the war in Ukraine has killed and displaced, in the aggregate, far more people than in Gaza. And Sudan is far higher than both. I don't think that makes one any worse or any more worthy of sympathy than the other.

Well yes, we believe the victims of aggression in wars as opposed to the aggressors. Or do you not believe reports of abuse from Palestinians?

Yes, they are not loyal to the state of Lebanon because their goal, at the time, was to create an Islamic state in place of Lebanon AND defend against the Israeli invasion. Lebanon had been in a civil war since 1975 (which would only end in 1990), and was invaded by Israel in 1982, why would they be loyal to Lebanon (in this case, to the Lebanese government) when their goal was to win the civil war and create an Islamic shia state? Their goals would later change but it makes no sense for, at the time of its creation, Hezbollah to be loyal to the Lebanese state. There were fascist Lebanese christian militias, with Israeli support, [massacring muslims](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre) at this time (and prior to that as well. [1975](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Saturday_(Lebanon)), [1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karantina_massacre) and [2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_al-Zaatar_massacre) in 1976, [1978 ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehden_massacre)and [1980](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safra_massacre) (and these are the only the ones where the Phalangists were involved)). Why would a group made up of several islamist militias be loyal to the state of Lebanon considering this?