Once they put pen on the paper it's done, well done for Arafat not signing the shitty deal, living legally under the Israeli control for eternity.Now, they definitely would not have gained full sovereignty, but it would have been a giant step towards it.
Netanyahu refuses to be dictated to by a foreign leader and launches a massive military assault on Haifa. Declares Hamas made him do it.
Let me guess, the US vetoed it?12 voted in favor of the latest UNSC vote for making Palestine a full UN member.
2 abstained and one voted against.
"accept a commitment"Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Can you elaborate on the bolded? Would you like to see more bloodshed?"accept a commitment"
again, like a lot of this, would be funny if it wasn't in service of an ongoing genocide.
...
i genuinely believe we will have a scientifically interesting generation of psychopaths from gaza - the ones who are about 5-10 years old now and have lost some/most family. some have recently had israeli drones playing the sounds of children crying at them so that they come out and get shot. i guess their trust in others, value for their own life, etc will be fundamentally broken. there are also the effects of extended malnourishment on brain development.
if they get the chance to unleash genuine hell on israel, it would be deserved.
what i want is irrelevantCan you elaborate on the bolded? Would you like to see more bloodshed?
Shocked.12 voted in favor of the latest UNSC vote for making Palestine a full UN member.
2 abstained and one voted against.
Yep, agreed. You’d think in any other situation (democracy and the link) a vote of 12/15 would comfortably carry any motion/resolution but here we literally have 1 vote which vetoes it. What’s the point if it’s that compromised to the whims of 1/minority?And immediately after that, Russia and China vetoed the US resolution for an immediate ceasefire and return of the hostages.
UN is the most useless thing ever.
As it has always been: to protect the interests of superpowers (the US, USSR/Russia, and China).Yep, agreed. You’d think in any other situation (democracy and the link) a vote of 12/15 would comfortably carry any motion/resolution but here we literally have 1 vote which vetoes it. What’s the point if it’s that compromised to the whims of 1/minority?
Interesting, didn't know this, thanks!As it has always been: to protect the interests of superpowers (the US, USSR/Russia, and China).
France and UK have unilaterally (albeit informally) decided to not use veto power (the last time they used it was in 1989).
Have you seen some of the members of the security council? The dictionaries in their countries probably don't even have the word democracy in them.Yep, agreed. You’d think in any other situation (democracy and the link) a vote of 12/15 would comfortably carry any motion/resolution but here we literally have 1 vote which vetoes it. What’s the point if it’s that compromised to the whims of 1/minority?
Yeah, pointless organisation.As it has always been: to protect the interests of superpowers (the US, USSR/Russia, and China).
France and UK have unilaterally (albeit informally) decided to not use veto power (the last time they used it was in 1989).
Yeah I know but my point was more around how voting on matters should (or does) usually work for majority, versus having only a select few with absolute veto powers etc. which makes it completely pointless.Have you seen some of the members of the security council? The dictionaries in their countries probably don't even have the word democracy in them.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You know very well why they vetoed, but disingenuously you chose to not say why. It was not a ceasefire resolution, it was green light for Israel to invade Rafah.And immediately after that, Russia and China vetoed the US resolution for an immediate ceasefire and return of the hostages.
UN is the most useless thing ever.
These are impotent measures with zero effect on Israeli state barbarism.Gopstein is very close to Ben Gvir - US sanctions ally of Israeli minister, fundraisers for 'extremist' settlers
The hilarious, self inflicted humiliation of Germany continues...Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What a weird stick to beat Germany withThe hilarious, self inflicted humiliation of Germany continues...
Germany went and still goes farther than any country in the world, breaking conferences, even arresting and banning from the country people showing support to Palestine. Yet:The hilarious, self inflicted humiliation of Germany continues...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If that poster deliberately & knowingly twists narratives in that manner, then that is despicable.You know very well why they vetoed, but disingenuously you chose to not say why. It was not a ceasefire resolution, it was green light for Israel to invade Rafah.
"Algeria’s Ambassador Amar Bendjama
Emphasizing “measures” to reduce civilian harm and talk of “operations” implies a license for continuing bloodshed for Israel. The operation in Rafah would have devastating consequences if it goes ahead, he added"
Just think about it, why would Algeria oppose a ceasefire resolution and vote against it?If that poster deliberately & knowingly twists narratives in that manner, then that is despicable.
Where does it say so? https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147856You know very well why they vetoed, but disingenuously you chose to not say why. It was not a ceasefire resolution, it was green light for Israel to invade Rafah.
"Algeria’s Ambassador Amar Bendjama
Emphasizing “measures” to reduce civilian harm and talk of “operations” implies a license for continuing bloodshed for Israel. The operation in Rafah would have devastating consequences if it goes ahead, he added"
My best guess is because the US resolution was weaker than the one the US had just vetoed. While for China and Russia, they vetoed it cause the US has been vetoing their resolutions, so it is a bit of tit for tat. It is in their best interest for US to continue losing face.Just think about it, why would Algeria oppose a ceasefire resolution and vote against it?
They have been advocating for a ceasefire for 6 months.
It's literally their in the link you provided.Where does it say so? https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147856
Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said the US had promised an agreement to end the fighting time and time again.
Now, the US has finally recognized the need for a ceasefire, when more than 30,000 Gazans have already died.
He said the US was trying to "sell a product" to the Council by using the word imperative in its resolution.
"This is not enough" and the Council must "demand a ceasefire", he declared.
He said there was no call for a ceasefire in the text, accusing US leadership of "deliberately misleading the international community." The draft is just playing to US voters, he said, "to throw them a bone" with a false ceasefire call
Maybe I cannot ready having barely slept yesterday, but where does it say so in the resolution?It's literally their in the link you provided.