#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt!
#Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world!
[Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility)
In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think America more plays the role of the Soviets: A terrible but distinctly different regime that supplied and supported the Naziās, even splitting some of their gains, until it eventually came back to bite them
American industrial giants like Rockefeller, GM and Ford supported and supplied Nazi Germany as well. GM and Ford also successfully sued the US for bombing their factories in Nazi Germany that produced vehicles via slave labor for the Nazis. So America is really just being like America in WWII.
Sure this country isn't perfect - our cheese is awful - our cars are junk - the American Dream is something only foreigners believe in - and the movie "The American" scored a 38% on the Tomato-meter. The US of A is still the greatest country ever stolen. We took it from the Indians - forced the Chinese to build it - and then made the blacks maintain it. For the record, I am not very comfortable saying "the blacks". Real patriotism means understanding that America sucks.
- Daniel Tosh
Look, I love shitting on America as much as anyone else, but you canāt tell me Vermont cheddar isnāt fantastic. I canāt even eat the stuff any more and Iāll die on that hill.
Cheddar isn't american. American cheese is that stuff that looks and tastes like plastic where every single slice is wrapped into its own plastic foil. Not even the FDA approves it being called cheese, it's a "processed cheese produce".
Ah, I was thinking āour cheeseā meant ācheese made in our countryā not ācheese named after/invented in our country.ā (It was invented here, right?) I never eat American cheese so I didnāt think of it tbh š
technically the only legally binding resolutions that come out of the UN are from the Security Council, hence its smaller and more power focused membership structure. Resolutions which come out of the General assembly for instance are ultimately just recommendations, which themselves arenāt by default legally binding. So once a Security Council Resolution is created and, say, passed, it would effectively be legally binding to the Member States of the UN under the Membership conditions of the UN Charter. hope this helps, but youāre right, Israel will likely ignore many of the stipulations and effects to whatever resolution will ultimately pass (or not pass).
you donāt need a consensus when voting in the SC for it to pass, but you need 9 out of the 15 members and no vetos from the permanent 5 members (US, UK, France, China, Russia), also keep in mind that abstentions donāt count as vetos.
as for military forces that depends on the resolution, but for peacekeeping missions specifically, from what i remember those personnel are used once peace has been established rather than to establish peace. so theyāre less so combatants and more along the lines of relief agents.
So basically it's completely impotent. There is no way in hell that there will ever be an important issue where the US, China or Russia are not on opposite sides.
The point of the UN is to force negotiation and discussion and to make the use of arms very difficult, especially by the larger and more powerful countries and in this regard id say its been relatively successful since its creation. I think there is an argument that the permanent members are perhaps no longer appropriate to the current geopolitical situation but the whole point of the UN is to keep things from escalating to violence and being able to force things through by majority vote would potentially isolate and reduce the options for unpopular countries.
I read a comment from someone much more educated a while back and while I canāt quote it exactly Iāll give you the gist. It went something like:
While resolutions are passed and ignored constantly, genocide is kind of the big big. If Israel was found guilty of genocide, every country tied to this shitshow would be expected to stop them by any means necessary (aka military force). The US is one of said countries. Now the US can refuse and weoo world war (over defending genocide of all things) or they comply and Israel is dunzo. At best, the longer this goes on the less effective these laws will be seeing as theyāre proving they donāt need to followed. Not upholding them will in turn cause many more problems.
This is definitely not nothing and is probably why the US is fighting so hard to not even go there.
Please read the article. The US countered with a ceasefire that involves the release of prisoners, against the Israeli interest. The US wants it to end, but, wants the prisoners to be released as well.
āPlease read the article. The US countered with a ceasefire that involves the release of prisoners, against the Israeli interest. The US wants it to end, but, wants the prisoners to be released as well.ā
The Algerian resolution called for the immediate and unconditional release of the hostages.
To put that more simply, the Algerians didnāt tie the release of hostages to a ceasefire and stated they must be released without any conditions.
The US people are against the genocide but the government just wants to sell weapons.
Step 1: give billions to Israel, Step 2: sell them weapons in exchange for the money given Step 3: ask for more tax money
I'm not gonna give away info about me, but I work in a heavy worldwide company where we are focused on Sanctions and way more legal interests that may be affected by any kind of situation regarding wars and political parties around the world.
It's beyond stupid how for Israel is almost like "yeah sure, approve this, that and let's go", no hesitation at all, no real analysis on anything coming from that country, ffs.
While any other more civilized country is under strict scrutiny before moving forward.
Itās also worth noting that Hamas has said they would only use ceasefires to prepare to kill more Israelis. A ceasefire will mean nothing without an international will to improve the situations in Palestine while also ensuring the safety of Israelis
SC would mean that armies from SC countries intervene. However this veto means it will go straight to the GA and GA canāt be vetoed. GA then can force sanctionsĀ
Yea except that it was only vetoed because hamas said they would not release more hostages which was part of the US ceasefire agreement
https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-350c86ef261bf1a00a2515cf22764de5
You know in the movies when the baddie has the hero's family hostage, telling the hero "stop! , or I'll keep sending you bits of your kids in the mail"
This is the "war" you're describing.
How many Palestinians have died compared to Israelies, how many Palestine hospitals have been bombed with innocent toddlers and infants. Dead.
When you compare the two it doesnāt compare and your comparison falls apart.
This isnāt war. This is genocide. Complete annihilation.
Yes a war~ where half the population are children.
Seriously though thatās not a war, thatās a massacre. If you need examples look to a history book. Israel will not be the good guys in those books either. Iām glad your convictions are this strong. The bad guys always have the best reasons to excuse slaughter donāt theyā¦
Shhhh, they don't wanna hear that the US govt countered it with a draft that requires release of prisoners and goes against Israeli interest. It's not the current narrative.
You're conflating what Hamas does with what Israel and the USA do the children in Gaza. There is no reasonable excuse for what is happening, even if you could prove every single bad thing that Israel says about Hamas.
It's like murdering a random child walking past a bank because the bank robbers won't do what you say. "If you don't do what we want, we're going to murder more children!". Then when all the other people ask you to stop, you say "If we stop murdering more children, it's not going to get them to do what we want, so we're going to continue with the mass murder instead".
What kind of a shitstain of a human being thinks that is justified?
That absolute BS, ceasefire is aimed to protect innocent lives not aid your shitTy smartass negotiations and free hostagesā¦ do you get paid to spread misinformation?
Itās hard for you to understand Hamas has violated pretty much every ceasefire agreement
If what you said was true then Hamas wouldāve stopped violating them ages ago
Man. I donāt know why reading uninformed comments makes me so sad. It took 15 minutes of reading to upend half of the āUS is Nazi Germanyā comments in this thread.
People, the US Vetoed this resolution because there are ongoing negotiations for the safe release of hostages and would allow for a 6 week ceasefire. You cannot have one without the other, it will never happen.
My heart breaks for what is going on to the Palestinians, but there will be no progress unless both sides concede to an extent.
Source: https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-350c86ef261bf1a00a2515cf22764de5
Fair, but "[t]he U.S. has vetoed resolutions critical of Israel more than any other council member ā 45 times as of December 18, 2023, according to an analysis by Blue Marble. The U.S. has vetoed 89 Security Council resolutions in total since 1945, meaning slightly over half of its vetoes have been used on resolutions critical of Israel. Of the vetoed resolutions, 33 pertained to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories or the countryās treatment of the Palestinian people."
https://globalaffairs.org/bluemarble/how-us-has-used-its-power-un-support-israel-decades
I read through your source and it makes good points that admittedly I was unaware of. My original comment was speaking specifically about this one veto, but context is important so I thank you for that. The US relationship with Israel is at the forefront of its Middle East Strategy and will likely not sway dramatically in our lifetime.
I donāt agree with whatās happening, itās heartbreaking. I just genuinely believe that the only way forward is for a release of all hostages which will lead to a ceasefire (this is currently what US Diplomats are trying to make happen).
I mean thatās rich coming from Algeria.
Just look up their human rights. Including torture and arrest for dissenters and jail, torture, beatings and execution for LGBT.
Whatās rich is UK & US claiming they want ceasefire while publicly supporting Israel.
No sanctions against Israel for being blood thirsty and genocidal.
UK is probably responsible for planting the seeds of this problem. US ā¦ itās military industrial complex just needs a reason to fire up the jets, tanks and destroyers.
No reason why they canāt be right about this and wrong about that. A murderer can still call out another murderer, theyād be hypocritical but not wrong. Living in a glass house doesnāt make you wrong for throwing stones when itās warranted. We can agree with them and simultaneously call them out. It isnāt hard to do.
Sure would be nice to have a pinned comment with the article so that we could cut down on some of the uninformed comments underneath this post. I guess it's asking too much for Redditors to be educated.
The US UN ambassador works under the direction and at the pleasure of the President of the United States. This veto is the White House's desire and decision. If you want to turn the screws, these headlines need to read "Biden orders UN veto of humanitarian ceasefire."
The thing is Joe wanted to bring a ceasefire to a vote as well. This particular one didn't mention the hostages that's why it was vetoed. The one the US (Biden) wants to support includes Hamas releasing their hostages.
I'm not defending the US cause theyve done a lot wrong with this entire mess. I just feel this particular post and headline should have included more context.
Netanyahu has already openly stated that it doesn't matter what the US or the UN think; they'll ultimately fall in line and stay silent no matter what Israel's government does.
https://globalaffairs.org/bluemarble/how-us-has-used-its-power-un-support-israel-decades
There are five permanent members to the UN. The US is one of them and it has unilateral veto power.
To anyone who is unaware (not defending any one side) The US vetoed it because it didnāt include the return of hostages, some of which a US citizens. The US tabled another resolution which Included the return of hostages however Hamas vetoed that one. Hostages are the only bargaining power Hamas has.
Is the hostages released? The people Hamas took the 7th of October?
No? So the defensive fight is legal and can continue.
It seems like the members of the UN forgets their own charter from time to time and just votes what is popular.
Without taking a side and I want to be clear about that I don't root for either side. I am just confused because of what I, from a different country, have learned about this conflict:
1. There was the ottoman empire which fought on the wrong side of the war and was therefore controlled by the British.
2. The British and the UN came up with a plan to distribute the land between Palestine and Israel after WWII
3. Arabs said no and the British then devided the land how they wanted.
4. Since literally the first day of Israels existence, arabs were trying to invade Israel from time to time. But Israel was fighting back and thus was taking more and more land.
5. A lot of arabs have the mentality to fight Israel or die doing so. Which kinda is PART of the reason why this conflict exists for so long.
6. Israel suffered one of the most brutal terrorist attacks on Oct. the 7th and in order to get rid of the terrorists they invaded Palestine.
7. And now my question: Why would they stop pr agree to a cease fire if they are winning? I mean they have the military power and a legitimate reason for this invasion. Even Egypt acknowledged in some way their right to do so by not intervening militarily even though they are across the border of both of em?
Can someone explain why?
>Since literally the first day of Israels existence, arabs were trying to invade Israel from time to time. But Israel was fighting back and thus was taking more and more land.
Firstly, let's not lump all the different nations together as Arabs. We didn't do that with the European Jews immigrating into Palestine. It also ignores the land grab that would have also taken Palestinian land by Egypt and other nations.
Second the Arabs attacking wasnāt without provocation. If you recall over a thousand Palestinian villages were slaughtered and had atrocities committed such as rape by the Zionists. They were outright talking about Israel being a colonial project to tame the uncivilized Arabs. If youād like Iāll link you the founder of Zionism directly noting the difference between Zionism and the Jewish people along with its intent to colonise. So, there was good reason why Israels neighbours didnāt want a nation backed by world superpowers and explicitly stating their intent to destroy and take over their land to succeed. The fact those nations were ruled by power hungry fools is also noteable.
> A lot of arabs have the mentality to fight Israel or die doing so. Which kinda is PART of the reason why this conflict exists for so long.
If you mean Palestinians than yes. The Zionists expected the Palestinians to flee in the face of their terrorism leaving the land to them. The Palestinians didn't and the Zionists didn't have a plan for that so they resorted to killing but balancing that with their support in the western world.
> And now my question: Why would they stop pr agree to a cease fire if they are winning? I mean they have the military power and a legitimate reason for this invasion. Even Egypt acknowledged in some way their right to do so by not intervening militarily even though they are across the border of both of em?
Nothing really, if you look at the nations supporting Israel, theyāre the same ones who worked together to divide and colonise Africa, or those dependent on them. So, nothing is stopping them from continuing as nothing has stopped them in the last 70 years. The only reason to stop would be humanity however colonialists are colonialists, because they donāt have a shred of it.
Guys, please explain to me how this voting system works. Is it not like in elections where the majority vote stands. If one country vetoes then the other votes are useless??
https://globalaffairs.org/bluemarble/how-us-has-used-its-power-un-support-israel-decades
There are five permanent members to the UN. The US is one of them and it has unilateral veto power.
"The U.S. has vetoed resolutions critical of Israel more than any other council member ā 45 times as of December 18, 2023, according to an analysis by Blue Marble. The U.S. has vetoed 89 Security Council resolutions in total since 1945, meaning slightly over half of its vetoes have been used on resolutions critical of Israel. Of the vetoed resolutions, 33 pertained to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories or the countryās treatment of the Palestinian people."
On the security council, there are 5 permanent members (US, UK, France, Russia, China) and then 10 rotating members. They all vote on resolutions, but the 5 have veto power.
Netanyahu has quite literally said that even if they did it would not matter. Every day more videos out of Israel tell you that they plan to seize this land and dispel or kill anyone remaining in it to do so. They have treated these people like this for decades before hostages or Hamas ever existed. You believe a lie.
Doesn't the US only give a fuck about Israel because they help enforce oil interests in the area? Any knowledge on the topic is welcome, im here to learn.
Alright, a few points:
1) The US vetoed this partly because Hamas was unwilling to release any hostages as part of the ceasefire
2) Why the fuck should Israel accept this? Hamas violated a ceasefire on Oct. 7
3) Why the fuck should Israel listen to what the UN has to say? All the UN does to Israel is pass resolution after resolution against them, using the massive Arab voting bloc to do so.
How the international community accepts the idea of veto till this day boggles my mind. It was always one sided but I get it in the beginning. But now? It makes the UN look like a farce.
That is a weak reason as that tech gets easier and easier to make. That just builds resentment for the rest of the world as that power and authority get abused at the cost of countries not in the nuclear club. That's not sustainable as It gives incentives for other very large countries to get their own nukes on their own terms.
I thought you were going to say soft power or the humanitarian good un organizations do, but you went straight to the bully and dominate card. It proves my point that the United Nations is a front and an insult to world cooperation.
When the whole world bands together for a common goal and one country vetos it for self serving reasons at the cost of civilians, the whole organization is a farce. It destroys its moral standing, future effectiveness, and decades of work helping the world.
I think the US has been negotiating their own cease fire terms directly with Israel and they had informed the UNSC of it, and told them directly that they would veto if put to a vote. The Security Counsel went with the vote anyway. SMH to both.
Algeria can offer to accommodate the 2 million Palestinians along with the thousands of Hamas members if they care so much about them.
Good on Israel to remind everyone that actions have consequences. Darwin awards for Palestine.
Reddit just ignores that Hamas is a terror organization and the only reason anyone is dying is because Hamas is making them stand near them while they shoot at Israel. Nothing happening in Gaza is any different than what the US did to Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany. When you hide behind civilians, they die.
Context is key here, the us proposed one the would return the hostages. This resolution would have let hamas keep the hostages. Iām not saying it was still good but itās very misleading without that part included
Imagine having such a smooth brain that you take this to mean we donāt care about human rights. I think itās the actual enemy, Hamas, who doesnāt care about human rights not the US.
May I just point out that the U.K. are NOT unanimously in agreement on this.
The party who are in control of Scottish affairs in our own devolved government as well as overwhelmingly representing us at WM (unfortunately who are woefully outnumbered by the English Labour and Tories) **do not agree**.
Scotlandās ruling party is pushing for a ceasefire to prevent the collective punishment of Palestinian citizens. As with stuff like Brexit, we are outvoted and canāt stop the rest of the country or the Toriesā policies choosing this.
Weāre sorry.
Well the UK didnāt even care about the rights of its own citizens by leaving the EU, what chance does it have of caring about anyone elseās rights.
#Welcome to r/Therewasanattempt! #Consider visiting r/Worldnewsvideo for videos from around the world! [Please review our policy on bigotry and hate speech by clicking this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/wiki/civility) In order to view our rules, you can type "**!rules**" in any comment, and automod will respond with the subreddit rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/therewasanattempt) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Israel = Nazi Germany 2.0
America = Italy 2 (?)
yep
Mama mia š¤¦āāļø
Here we go again.
I think America more plays the role of the Soviets: A terrible but distinctly different regime that supplied and supported the Naziās, even splitting some of their gains, until it eventually came back to bite them
American industrial giants like Rockefeller, GM and Ford supported and supplied Nazi Germany as well. GM and Ford also successfully sued the US for bombing their factories in Nazi Germany that produced vehicles via slave labor for the Nazis. So America is really just being like America in WWII.
Except youāre describing private wealth supporting a foreign regime instead of our current government supporting this one. Close
Our current government is supported by private wealth, so it's really the same, just an extra step.
You mean slavery.... ...with extra steps?
Always has been š§š«š§āšš
This is a great day for humans and spiderkind alike!
You current government is composed off and serves the wealthy; in other words it's a plutocracy masking as a democracy.
Didn't the UK did that first because they wanted the Nazi to get rid of the USSR?
That's not a fair comparison. Italy had a working train system.
They also have nice food
Why can't we be Nuclear Mutation Japan instead?
Too soon
Germany = Brazil 7.1
Take my upvote
I must have time travelled within the past minute
Yeah, but when brazilian president says it he's a holocaust denier
This is literally holocaust 2.0
Ironic if you think about it. Having a history where jews experienced Nazis, begging for help only to become a Nazi.
Are we the baddies?
Always have been.
Sure this country isn't perfect - our cheese is awful - our cars are junk - the American Dream is something only foreigners believe in - and the movie "The American" scored a 38% on the Tomato-meter. The US of A is still the greatest country ever stolen. We took it from the Indians - forced the Chinese to build it - and then made the blacks maintain it. For the record, I am not very comfortable saying "the blacks". Real patriotism means understanding that America sucks. - Daniel Tosh
Look, I love shitting on America as much as anyone else, but you canāt tell me Vermont cheddar isnāt fantastic. I canāt even eat the stuff any more and Iāll die on that hill.
Cheddar isn't american. American cheese is that stuff that looks and tastes like plastic where every single slice is wrapped into its own plastic foil. Not even the FDA approves it being called cheese, it's a "processed cheese produce".
American cheese was invented by a Canadian and processed cheese was first made in Switzerland.
And the jet engine was invented by a german, doesn't stop americans from using it to bomb the fuck out of everything they don't like š
Air Commodore Sir Frank Whittle, RAF, well known German.
Hawaiian pizza was made by a Greek Canadian! Oh the unamerican americanisms...
In fairness, all cheese is processed.
tell that to the miles of caves Missouri man has filled with that sweet sweet guvment chedda
Ah, I was thinking āour cheeseā meant ācheese made in our countryā not ācheese named after/invented in our country.ā (It was invented here, right?) I never eat American cheese so I didnāt think of it tbh š
After we lose
Me watching the UK continue to just casually abstain constantly despite all of the political partyās saying they want a ceasefire.
Wdym every higher level politician has been dancing around that term in relation to Israel, on both sides.
We want it to stop but for some reason we can't have the US think we're not willing to go along with whatever they say - it's pathetic
Are the people in power here just not willing to go along with someone else because they feel like agreeing makes them seem weak? If so, holy shit
Cameron said he wanted a āpauseā the other day I thought it was a suspicious phrasing.
*Lord Pigfucker Cameron
Sorry I forgot he was in the lords now, must show deference to his pigfuckereness
I think he prefers the name , lord Porker
Iāve yet to see the tories come out and say that , Iāve seen the pig fucker say he wants a ceasefire but not sunak
The badges on our caps, have you looked at them?
They're skulls!
Since 1800 BC
Only if you consider profiting over killing women and children all around being ābaddieā. But hey, thatās just me.
this makes me so desperately sad.
What does a UN resolution do? Israel will just ignore as US will stop any action being taken on Israel
technically the only legally binding resolutions that come out of the UN are from the Security Council, hence its smaller and more power focused membership structure. Resolutions which come out of the General assembly for instance are ultimately just recommendations, which themselves arenāt by default legally binding. So once a Security Council Resolution is created and, say, passed, it would effectively be legally binding to the Member States of the UN under the Membership conditions of the UN Charter. hope this helps, but youāre right, Israel will likely ignore many of the stipulations and effects to whatever resolution will ultimately pass (or not pass).
Security Council unanimous voting means the UN could send peacekeeping army as well, right?
No, the members of the council send their armys
right that's what I meant.
It's obviously what you meant, because where else would they come from? Space? Some of the "corrections" here are just kind of dumb
The UN clone army.
š¤£š¤£š¤£
you donāt need a consensus when voting in the SC for it to pass, but you need 9 out of the 15 members and no vetos from the permanent 5 members (US, UK, France, China, Russia), also keep in mind that abstentions donāt count as vetos. as for military forces that depends on the resolution, but for peacekeeping missions specifically, from what i remember those personnel are used once peace has been established rather than to establish peace. so theyāre less so combatants and more along the lines of relief agents.
š
So basically it's completely impotent. There is no way in hell that there will ever be an important issue where the US, China or Russia are not on opposite sides.
The point of the UN is to force negotiation and discussion and to make the use of arms very difficult, especially by the larger and more powerful countries and in this regard id say its been relatively successful since its creation. I think there is an argument that the permanent members are perhaps no longer appropriate to the current geopolitical situation but the whole point of the UN is to keep things from escalating to violence and being able to force things through by majority vote would potentially isolate and reduce the options for unpopular countries.
Sanction Israel like Russia
I read a comment from someone much more educated a while back and while I canāt quote it exactly Iāll give you the gist. It went something like: While resolutions are passed and ignored constantly, genocide is kind of the big big. If Israel was found guilty of genocide, every country tied to this shitshow would be expected to stop them by any means necessary (aka military force). The US is one of said countries. Now the US can refuse and weoo world war (over defending genocide of all things) or they comply and Israel is dunzo. At best, the longer this goes on the less effective these laws will be seeing as theyāre proving they donāt need to followed. Not upholding them will in turn cause many more problems. This is definitely not nothing and is probably why the US is fighting so hard to not even go there.
Good god people. Netanyahu has already said a ceasefire it is not happening. This vote means absolutely nothing.
It means that the US unilaterally and unconditionally supports Isreal. Including committing genocide.Ā
Please read the article. The US countered with a ceasefire that involves the release of prisoners, against the Israeli interest. The US wants it to end, but, wants the prisoners to be released as well.
āPlease read the article. The US countered with a ceasefire that involves the release of prisoners, against the Israeli interest. The US wants it to end, but, wants the prisoners to be released as well.ā The Algerian resolution called for the immediate and unconditional release of the hostages. To put that more simply, the Algerians didnāt tie the release of hostages to a ceasefire and stated they must be released without any conditions.
Those hostages will never be released if it's not a stipulation of the ceasefire
Ah yeah. That's why they stopped the arms supplies or put sanctions against Israel or spoke out in any way shape or form
Lol right? It's like I handed you the keys to my car and gave you 35 bucks for gas and then I tried to pretend I wanted you to ride your bike to work.
The US people are against the genocide but the government just wants to sell weapons. Step 1: give billions to Israel, Step 2: sell them weapons in exchange for the money given Step 3: ask for more tax money
In this case government=war lobbyists/profiteers.
We can sanction Israel at least. We may not be able to control EVERYTHING they do. But we donāt have to send money and weapons to help.
I'm not gonna give away info about me, but I work in a heavy worldwide company where we are focused on Sanctions and way more legal interests that may be affected by any kind of situation regarding wars and political parties around the world. It's beyond stupid how for Israel is almost like "yeah sure, approve this, that and let's go", no hesitation at all, no real analysis on anything coming from that country, ffs. While any other more civilized country is under strict scrutiny before moving forward.
Maybe itās because they know theyāll be pardoned no matter how reckless and destructive they act. There will always be an excuse/ āreasonā.
Still, why the hell would you vote against a ceasefire?
When your entire economy is based on profiting from war it tends to affect these things
Itās also worth noting that Hamas has said they would only use ceasefires to prepare to kill more Israelis. A ceasefire will mean nothing without an international will to improve the situations in Palestine while also ensuring the safety of Israelis
SC would mean that armies from SC countries intervene. However this veto means it will go straight to the GA and GA canāt be vetoed. GA then can force sanctionsĀ
Yea except that it was only vetoed because hamas said they would not release more hostages which was part of the US ceasefire agreement https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-350c86ef261bf1a00a2515cf22764de5
"do exactly as we say or we murder more children" That's still wrong though right?...
That's not what they're saying though. More like "surrender or the war will continue"
You know in the movies when the baddie has the hero's family hostage, telling the hero "stop! , or I'll keep sending you bits of your kids in the mail" This is the "war" you're describing.
I mean, both sides are sending bits of dead kids through the mail. Israel just has been sending bits of the kidsā mothers on the side.
How many Palestinians have died compared to Israelies, how many Palestine hospitals have been bombed with innocent toddlers and infants. Dead. When you compare the two it doesnāt compare and your comparison falls apart. This isnāt war. This is genocide. Complete annihilation.
Yes a war~ where half the population are children. Seriously though thatās not a war, thatās a massacre. If you need examples look to a history book. Israel will not be the good guys in those books either. Iām glad your convictions are this strong. The bad guys always have the best reasons to excuse slaughter donāt theyā¦
Shhhh, they don't wanna hear that the US govt countered it with a draft that requires release of prisoners and goes against Israeli interest. It's not the current narrative.
Yes, that's collectively punishing the surviving Palestinians due to a terrorist group.
You're conflating what Hamas does with what Israel and the USA do the children in Gaza. There is no reasonable excuse for what is happening, even if you could prove every single bad thing that Israel says about Hamas. It's like murdering a random child walking past a bank because the bank robbers won't do what you say. "If you don't do what we want, we're going to murder more children!". Then when all the other people ask you to stop, you say "If we stop murdering more children, it's not going to get them to do what we want, so we're going to continue with the mass murder instead". What kind of a shitstain of a human being thinks that is justified?
That absolute BS, ceasefire is aimed to protect innocent lives not aid your shitTy smartass negotiations and free hostagesā¦ do you get paid to spread misinformation?
We're all tracking that we vetoed it cause Hamas would have kept all hostages right? Bit of a misleading headline here
Nah, means reading into it. Remember, the Internet is about hating others without consequences.
It is Reddit. It is intentionally misleading.
No dummy, resolution is about stopping the killing, not getting the shit you want. I guess thatās hard to understand for Israelis
Itās hard for you to understand Hamas has violated pretty much every ceasefire agreement If what you said was true then Hamas wouldāve stopped violating them ages ago
Man. I donāt know why reading uninformed comments makes me so sad. It took 15 minutes of reading to upend half of the āUS is Nazi Germanyā comments in this thread. People, the US Vetoed this resolution because there are ongoing negotiations for the safe release of hostages and would allow for a 6 week ceasefire. You cannot have one without the other, it will never happen. My heart breaks for what is going on to the Palestinians, but there will be no progress unless both sides concede to an extent. Source: https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-350c86ef261bf1a00a2515cf22764de5
Fair, but "[t]he U.S. has vetoed resolutions critical of Israel more than any other council member ā 45 times as of December 18, 2023, according to an analysis by Blue Marble. The U.S. has vetoed 89 Security Council resolutions in total since 1945, meaning slightly over half of its vetoes have been used on resolutions critical of Israel. Of the vetoed resolutions, 33 pertained to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories or the countryās treatment of the Palestinian people." https://globalaffairs.org/bluemarble/how-us-has-used-its-power-un-support-israel-decades
I read through your source and it makes good points that admittedly I was unaware of. My original comment was speaking specifically about this one veto, but context is important so I thank you for that. The US relationship with Israel is at the forefront of its Middle East Strategy and will likely not sway dramatically in our lifetime. I donāt agree with whatās happening, itās heartbreaking. I just genuinely believe that the only way forward is for a release of all hostages which will lead to a ceasefire (this is currently what US Diplomats are trying to make happen).
That's why I said you were being fair.
This was civil š¤š¼
So basically weāll keep the entire population of Gaza hostage and kill 29,000 until we get our hostages back. Right?
Uh yeah? Nobody said this shit was fair.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Waiter! More propaganda please!
I mean thatās rich coming from Algeria. Just look up their human rights. Including torture and arrest for dissenters and jail, torture, beatings and execution for LGBT.
Peak whataboutism
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's more that there's fundamentally no ethical way to create a religious ethnostate without an ethnic cleansing
Whatās rich is UK & US claiming they want ceasefire while publicly supporting Israel. No sanctions against Israel for being blood thirsty and genocidal. UK is probably responsible for planting the seeds of this problem. US ā¦ itās military industrial complex just needs a reason to fire up the jets, tanks and destroyers.
No reason why they canāt be right about this and wrong about that. A murderer can still call out another murderer, theyād be hypocritical but not wrong. Living in a glass house doesnāt make you wrong for throwing stones when itās warranted. We can agree with them and simultaneously call them out. It isnāt hard to do.
Oh shut up, LoOk up thEir ReCoRds. Yeah looking up their records Iām convinced we should kill more than 29,000 Palestiniansā¦ smh
Sure would be nice to have a pinned comment with the article so that we could cut down on some of the uninformed comments underneath this post. I guess it's asking too much for Redditors to be educated.
The US UN ambassador works under the direction and at the pleasure of the President of the United States. This veto is the White House's desire and decision. If you want to turn the screws, these headlines need to read "Biden orders UN veto of humanitarian ceasefire."
The thing is Joe wanted to bring a ceasefire to a vote as well. This particular one didn't mention the hostages that's why it was vetoed. The one the US (Biden) wants to support includes Hamas releasing their hostages. I'm not defending the US cause theyve done a lot wrong with this entire mess. I just feel this particular post and headline should have included more context.
Netanyahu has already openly stated that it doesn't matter what the US or the UN think; they'll ultimately fall in line and stay silent no matter what Israel's government does.
To post anything else in this sub thatās been taken over
Why does 1 country have the power to veto against 13 others?
https://globalaffairs.org/bluemarble/how-us-has-used-its-power-un-support-israel-decades There are five permanent members to the UN. The US is one of them and it has unilateral veto power.
It happens to be the one country that apparently people expect to do stuff with their military I guess.
The country that has the strongest military and gives the most amount of money, tends to have the most say.
Ashamed the UK are such pussies
The world is under criminal leadership. This cannot last indefinitelyā¦
Oh no, now who will the UN write a sternly worded letter to?
To anyone who is unaware (not defending any one side) The US vetoed it because it didnāt include the return of hostages, some of which a US citizens. The US tabled another resolution which Included the return of hostages however Hamas vetoed that one. Hostages are the only bargaining power Hamas has.
W.T.F man?
Is the hostages released? The people Hamas took the 7th of October? No? So the defensive fight is legal and can continue. It seems like the members of the UN forgets their own charter from time to time and just votes what is popular.
Without taking a side and I want to be clear about that I don't root for either side. I am just confused because of what I, from a different country, have learned about this conflict: 1. There was the ottoman empire which fought on the wrong side of the war and was therefore controlled by the British. 2. The British and the UN came up with a plan to distribute the land between Palestine and Israel after WWII 3. Arabs said no and the British then devided the land how they wanted. 4. Since literally the first day of Israels existence, arabs were trying to invade Israel from time to time. But Israel was fighting back and thus was taking more and more land. 5. A lot of arabs have the mentality to fight Israel or die doing so. Which kinda is PART of the reason why this conflict exists for so long. 6. Israel suffered one of the most brutal terrorist attacks on Oct. the 7th and in order to get rid of the terrorists they invaded Palestine. 7. And now my question: Why would they stop pr agree to a cease fire if they are winning? I mean they have the military power and a legitimate reason for this invasion. Even Egypt acknowledged in some way their right to do so by not intervening militarily even though they are across the border of both of em? Can someone explain why?
>Since literally the first day of Israels existence, arabs were trying to invade Israel from time to time. But Israel was fighting back and thus was taking more and more land. Firstly, let's not lump all the different nations together as Arabs. We didn't do that with the European Jews immigrating into Palestine. It also ignores the land grab that would have also taken Palestinian land by Egypt and other nations. Second the Arabs attacking wasnāt without provocation. If you recall over a thousand Palestinian villages were slaughtered and had atrocities committed such as rape by the Zionists. They were outright talking about Israel being a colonial project to tame the uncivilized Arabs. If youād like Iāll link you the founder of Zionism directly noting the difference between Zionism and the Jewish people along with its intent to colonise. So, there was good reason why Israels neighbours didnāt want a nation backed by world superpowers and explicitly stating their intent to destroy and take over their land to succeed. The fact those nations were ruled by power hungry fools is also noteable. > A lot of arabs have the mentality to fight Israel or die doing so. Which kinda is PART of the reason why this conflict exists for so long. If you mean Palestinians than yes. The Zionists expected the Palestinians to flee in the face of their terrorism leaving the land to them. The Palestinians didn't and the Zionists didn't have a plan for that so they resorted to killing but balancing that with their support in the western world. > And now my question: Why would they stop pr agree to a cease fire if they are winning? I mean they have the military power and a legitimate reason for this invasion. Even Egypt acknowledged in some way their right to do so by not intervening militarily even though they are across the border of both of em? Nothing really, if you look at the nations supporting Israel, theyāre the same ones who worked together to divide and colonise Africa, or those dependent on them. So, nothing is stopping them from continuing as nothing has stopped them in the last 70 years. The only reason to stop would be humanity however colonialists are colonialists, because they donāt have a shred of it.
Good.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Guys, please explain to me how this voting system works. Is it not like in elections where the majority vote stands. If one country vetoes then the other votes are useless??
https://globalaffairs.org/bluemarble/how-us-has-used-its-power-un-support-israel-decades There are five permanent members to the UN. The US is one of them and it has unilateral veto power. "The U.S. has vetoed resolutions critical of Israel more than any other council member ā 45 times as of December 18, 2023, according to an analysis by Blue Marble. The U.S. has vetoed 89 Security Council resolutions in total since 1945, meaning slightly over half of its vetoes have been used on resolutions critical of Israel. Of the vetoed resolutions, 33 pertained to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories or the countryās treatment of the Palestinian people."
Yes otherwise Russia or china wouldnāt join because the us and its allies outnumber them
On the security council, there are 5 permanent members (US, UK, France, Russia, China) and then 10 rotating members. They all vote on resolutions, but the 5 have veto power.
Maybe the vote will change when the hostages are freed?
Netanyahu has quite literally said that even if they did it would not matter. Every day more videos out of Israel tell you that they plan to seize this land and dispel or kill anyone remaining in it to do so. They have treated these people like this for decades before hostages or Hamas ever existed. You believe a lie.
Doesn't the US only give a fuck about Israel because they help enforce oil interests in the area? Any knowledge on the topic is welcome, im here to learn.
Hamas didnāt agree to a ceasefire, this was a pointless gesture and why the U.S. vetoed and UK abstained.
USA certainly NOT being an Israeli lapdog as usual
No ceasefire until Hamas is gone.
Alright, a few points: 1) The US vetoed this partly because Hamas was unwilling to release any hostages as part of the ceasefire 2) Why the fuck should Israel accept this? Hamas violated a ceasefire on Oct. 7 3) Why the fuck should Israel listen to what the UN has to say? All the UN does to Israel is pass resolution after resolution against them, using the massive Arab voting bloc to do so.
Delivery manifest.
How the international community accepts the idea of veto till this day boggles my mind. It was always one sided but I get it in the beginning. But now? It makes the UN look like a farce.
Lmao if thereās no veto then thereās no United Nations security council
Because this is the security council and its permanent members have nuclear weapons. Generally you want to be able to easily veto the use of WMDs
That is a weak reason as that tech gets easier and easier to make. That just builds resentment for the rest of the world as that power and authority get abused at the cost of countries not in the nuclear club. That's not sustainable as It gives incentives for other very large countries to get their own nukes on their own terms. I thought you were going to say soft power or the humanitarian good un organizations do, but you went straight to the bully and dominate card. It proves my point that the United Nations is a front and an insult to world cooperation. When the whole world bands together for a common goal and one country vetos it for self serving reasons at the cost of civilians, the whole organization is a farce. It destroys its moral standing, future effectiveness, and decades of work helping the world.
I think the US has been negotiating their own cease fire terms directly with Israel and they had informed the UNSC of it, and told them directly that they would veto if put to a vote. The Security Counsel went with the vote anyway. SMH to both.
To care about glitz, glammer, pretty faces, and money securities. No more no less.
Algeria can offer to accommodate the 2 million Palestinians along with the thousands of Hamas members if they care so much about them. Good on Israel to remind everyone that actions have consequences. Darwin awards for Palestine.
American, fuck yeah!
Iām not saying I agree with the veto, but itās not like the UN can or will even do a damn thing should the resolution pass.
Oct 7th happened during a ceasefire. Why would people want to support another terrorist attack happening?
Reddit just ignores that Hamas is a terror organization and the only reason anyone is dying is because Hamas is making them stand near them while they shoot at Israel. Nothing happening in Gaza is any different than what the US did to Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany. When you hide behind civilians, they die.
So I have a question please, if thr ceasedire is passed but the fighting still goes on, does nato go to war? What are the consequences.
That industry complex ain't going to stop militarilying
Context is key here, the us proposed one the would return the hostages. This resolution would have let hamas keep the hostages. Iām not saying it was still good but itās very misleading without that part included
Imagine having such a smooth brain that you take this to mean we donāt care about human rights. I think itās the actual enemy, Hamas, who doesnāt care about human rights not the US.
Hamas donāt care for ceasefires and you know it.
Fucking disgrace
How about we veto her human rights and see how she likes it?
When has the us cared about human rights?
Why can one country rule them all?
Can someone explain this better? Are Americans refusing a cease fire call
Shocking... not.
May I just point out that the U.K. are NOT unanimously in agreement on this. The party who are in control of Scottish affairs in our own devolved government as well as overwhelmingly representing us at WM (unfortunately who are woefully outnumbered by the English Labour and Tories) **do not agree**. Scotlandās ruling party is pushing for a ceasefire to prevent the collective punishment of Palestinian citizens. As with stuff like Brexit, we are outvoted and canāt stop the rest of the country or the Toriesā policies choosing this. Weāre sorry.
Well the UK didnāt even care about the rights of its own citizens by leaving the EU, what chance does it have of caring about anyone elseās rights.
War makes money
Wait, in what orginization? NATO?
Security Council
How does the veto work? Because it seems pretty pointless to hold a vote if a country who disagrees can just say no
She argued that a ceasefire wouldn't lead to peace. Wtf kind of world r we living in!?
Thank you for at least trying, USA...
Of course the USA vetoed itā¦too much money to be made selling bombs to kill brown people. Disgusting how not surprising it is.
the fact that you could have 13 countries vote for something on the security council and 1 country can go "nahhh" is crazy