this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
2036 points (98.8% liked)

politics

20346 readers
5023 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Vanishingly small? He has literally been using his child as a human shield since the UHC CEO was assassinated. The vanishingly small hypothetical is where it can be avoided.

This really is exactly like the excuse the IDF gives to kill Palestinians. They're being used as human shields by Hamas, so it's justifiable.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have no idea how often the human shield is wrapped around his head, but I would imagine any shooter who does their homework would be able to find many hours in the day when the child is not physically attached to him.

The obvious difference between this and the IDF is that, in this case, we have an actual human shield. Anyone who is paying attention knows that the IDF "human shield" justification is just a lie to cover for their atrocities.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why do you imagine that? What do you base it on? How could you even predict such a thing? At this point, you're just trying to avoid saying that murdering a child in order to assassinate someone is not justifiable.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I base it on the fact that the child in question is what, 4 years old? You know how often a 4 year old sleeps? There's naptime, and very early bedtime...

Is your argument honestly that the human shield is wrapped around his head literally every moment he is in public? You know how absurd that sounds, right?

The only thing it takes to disprove your hypothesis is a quick Google search showing dozens of recent pictures of his head without a human shield attached.

This conversation is getting very silly.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Oh right, I forgot what a kind and loving and caring father Elon Musk is, so he definitely does what's best for his child and doesn't just constantly use him as a human shield, even while in the Oval Office giving an official speech, am I right?

And, of course, Elon makes it very clear when he is going out in public and when his child is asleep so you always know every time.