Anthony Albanese says action to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon was acceptable, but that talks should now resume.
  • Kazel@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    1·
    19 hours ago

    oh, so we are already building teams for ww3… canada + eu vs usa + australia + china + russia + north korea vs middle east - could get tough though

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish
      161·
      2 days ago

      Yet, the greens received less votes and were the only party with an anti genocide agenda. Like America, Australia was uncaring at best.

      The country gets the representation it voted for.

      • Aussiemandeus@aussie.zoneEnglish
        64·
        2 days ago

        The greens are a flip flop party who will knock down a decent solution because it’s not perfect.

        That’s what the Australians I know think of them.

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish
          101·
          2 days ago

          Sticking to principles is the opposite of flip plop. I agree, they are not pragmatic, though. However, no other party with a chance at a seat was anti genocide. If they did the same or better, the argument could be made that aussies care. They did worse nationally. Aussies don’t care.

          • Aussiemandeus@aussie.zoneEnglish
            22·
            2 days ago

            Yes but governments can’t make massive changes in legislation easily and small incremental changes over time can achieve the same results.

            Like they say, don’t let perfection be the enemy of good

            • hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish
              22·
              2 days ago

              Yes, I agree, but they were still the only party that were opposed to genocide and nobody cared enough to vote for them.

              So whatever your views of the greens, the voters view of genocide was that it wasn’t important.

              • Aussiemandeus@aussie.zoneEnglish
                21·
                1 day ago

                No, that’s wrong.

                You can’t elect a party on one issue, three entire election is multifaceted you can’t try claim because the greens said the were against genocide and no one voted for them it’s simply due to that.

                The greens could have lost on any of their other policies with their views on genocide being ignored.

                Look at America, good old “genocide Joe”, lost the election being supposedly pro genocide while trump was going to fix it.

                No one is elected on one issue

                • hitmyspot@aussie.zoneEnglish
                  31·
                  1 day ago

                  No, I’m saying that as the only party to be anti genocide, if Australians cared about it as an issue, their votes would have increased, not decreased.

    • redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      2 days ago

      There was a guy who torture and killed dogs on video a while back. Guy was doxxed as a taxidermist with a house in the outback. Locals hunted him down and burned his house down before the cops could do anything. I don’t think anyone was ever charged with a crime.

      I don’t know what this has to do with this but it feels relevant somehow

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        72·
        2 days ago

        Yeah… No. The vast majority supported the genocide, either enthusiastically or through lesser evil politics. And no I’m not talking about voting for Harris; I’m talking about the liberal reaction to pro-Palestine protests and Uncommitted.

  • SereneSadie@lemmy.myserv.oneEnglish
    131·
    3 days ago

    Dutton, or the snake that replaced him, would be pushing for more.

    So, yeah, I’m not happy with this answer. But it’s still better than the alternative.

    Take fucking note, white lily American no-voters.

    • markko@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      3 days ago

      The US electoral system is utterly fucked. At least voting for a third-party in Aus can make some sort of difference.