The United Nations Security Council is likely to vote on Tuesday on an Algerian push for the 15-member body to demand an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war, said diplomats, a move the United States signaled it would veto.

“The United States does not support action on this draft resolution. Should it come up for a vote as drafted, it will not be adopted,” Thomas-Greenfield said in a statement on Saturday.

  • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    It truly amazes me that US still refuses to ceasefire after more than 20 000 normal civilians of the Palestinian people have been murdered by the Israeli government.

    This has nothing to do with either “self defense” or “defeating” Hamas anymore.

    • guriinii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because they support the actions of Zionist Israel. The US talk about getting in aid and of humanitarian ceasefires but they still give them billions of dollars and weapons.

  • Clot@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why is veto still there? How the hell is the US or any other veto country superior to others? How does their opinion matter more than what the majority of the world thinks? This veto thing should be abolished for good.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      The un is about making countries feel heard while the super powers run everything. It’s not about equal rights.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The UN is practically ran by America so chances are low it will change against its interests.

      Aside from lip-service the only time it will intervene is when an African dictator backed by Western powers is facing a revolution.

      I still like it because it forces countries to vote on something and openly show where they stand on subjects. But it doesn’t have much practical value.

    • assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because international law and order is more of a ‘here are laws that I order you to follow’ when it comes to the relation of powerful countries to weaker countries. It’s a joke.

    • mkwt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The veto and permanent seats are there to keep the superpowers in the UN organization. If you take away the veto, then US, Russia, etc would probably just say they don’t recognize the authority of the security council, and then go do their own thing.

      This veto mechanic kept the US and USSR in the room and at least talking to each other throughout the entire cold war. That’s gotta be worth something.

        • Cinner@lemmy.worldB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          We don’t know what it’s worth, because we aren’t living in an alternate universe where the US and USSR weren’t in open dialogue through the cold war. We’re still in the pre-WWIII reality (for a few years, at least).

          • Maalus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nah, we don’t need to be living in an alternate reality. It’s useless and never helps. The countries permanently on the security council always have an interest in any war that happens. So every resolution worth a damn is getting instantly vetoed by one of them. All it is, is facebook’s “thoughts and prayers” on the geopolitical scale.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That resolution was about humanitarian aid, and has been fully ignored and violated.

      Also the first ceasefire was vetoed by America because it “didn’t condemn Hamas”.

      Then Brazil submitted asimilar motion to call for a ceasefire AND condemn Hamas.** And then America vetoed it again.**

      Genocide Joe wants to keep this going