- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
Dearest Biden,
Please stop trying to get Trump elected.
Pleasant Regards, Everyone who gives a shit about abortion access.
Only reason Biden is free to support genocide is because his opponent is Trump. It is the current political climate responsible for Israel’s blatant disregard to humanity.
This is why Biden doesn’t care about his campaign promises. He just has to use the name Trump a few times in his speech and call several minority groups “the fabric of society” while doing nothing to help them. The only people winning during the next election is the lobbyists and the “bOtH muh SiDeS” people (the ones who complain if you critique about their favorite party).
Remember, Trump moved the whole US embassy to Jerusalem just to give Palestinians the middle finger. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1I810Z/ You can be sure that a very high majority of US politicians will take the same pro-Israel stand. The reason is simply campaign funding and lobbying. Look at AIPAC
Removed by mod
Grow up.
Removed by mod
I don’t think it was suggesting it.
Because Trump would have handled this better?
Only reason we didn’t end up with a war in Iran in 2020 is pure fucking luck.
No, Trump is clearly fucking worse… but I don’t want free Palestine folks to have a reason not to vote for Biden.
That doesn’t make any sense.
If Iran is allied with Russia, and Trump is Putin’s puppet, then wouldn’t Trump be good for Iran?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/04/10/iran-nuclear-bomb-iaea-fordow/
Trump had an Iranian general assassinated with a drone strike on an airport in Iraq in January 2020, killing 10 people. The fallout from that almost escalated into a war.
Only reason everyone forgot it was because 2020 was a super shitty year.
Brought to you by decades of Israeli lobbying money mixed with gullible religious morons in the U.S. legislature. Money in politics leads to genocide.
In 2023 Israel spent $4 million in lobbying and got $4 billion in aid. We should pool together and buy ourselves some politicians, y’all. No other investment reliably returns 1000:1.
We should pool together and buy ourselves some politicians, y’all.
Traditionally, one calls that “forming a party” but unfortunately we live in a two-party system.
It should be noted that the $4B Israel got wasn’t just $4B for Israel. It was $4B for purchase of US weapons systems too Israel. And it wasn’t just Israel lobbying for this spending. You had a host of MIC lobbyists throwing in their own millions.
It should further be noted that AIPAC isn’t just doing a one-time $4M retail purchase of legislation. They’ve spend decades building up an enormous back bench of former US Congresscritters, allied staffers, political bundlers, event organizers, and religious affiliates. They injected $4M down the funnel in an 11th-hour push for the next traunch of military kick-backs that they’ve been receiving since the Bush 43 administration.
No other investment reliably returns 1000:1.
Its important to recognize that Israel provides an incredibly vital service to the US military in the form of maintaining control of the Suez Canal. Its not just a 1000:1 ROI. They’re holding Egyptian national leadership at gunpoint and we’re kicking them over some money to keep the gun loaded.
“Biden and his administration are doing all they can” my ass!
They’re exactly as beholden to the Israeli apartheid state as all the previous ones going back to 1948, if not MORE than many of them.
Just one example of many that the DNC is still stuck in 1992 and almost half as unresponsive to the will of the majority of the people as the literal fascists on the other side of the aisle 🤬
Someone remind me again why does the US, or any country, have veto power in the UN?
A veto power basically makes the entire institution useless.
Because without it there would be no UN, and as useless as you think the current UN is, I promise you no UN is even more useless.
It’s bleak but the fact that we can even get everybody in the same room is remarkable. Like it or not, a UN where Monaco and the US (or, Russia, China, etc) have the same power at the table is a UN where the big players reject its authority and form their own clubs.
You say that all have the same power but Its never the small countries vetoing the big questions though.
Its always USA , China or Russia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vetoed_United_Nations_Security_Council_resolutions
He didn’t say all nations have the same power in the UN. He said the opposite. Read the comment before you reply to it
“Like it or not, a UN where Monaco and the US (…) have the same power at the table is a UN where the big players reject its authority and form their own clubs.”
Ah I see. I misread. It still stands though that to bring the big guys to the table, we give them the chance to have it their way and therefore get nowhere with the big questions
Only permanent members of UNSC have veto powers.
So the only way to get the big guys to the table is by giving them the option to have it their way by force
I know that there are pro’s and cons to this but IMO its too much power
Critics say that the veto is the most undemocratic element of the UN,[5] as well as the main cause of inaction on war crimes and crimes against humanity, as it effectively prevents UN action against the permanent members and their allies.[6]
(From wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power)
Only the five permanent members have a veto power on the security council. USA, China, Russia, UK, and France.
No one else has the power to veto.
In fact, I think grandparent was talking about a hypothetical and counterfactual world where every nation had the same powers at the UN.
- it’s* never the small countries
- It’s* always the USA
Justify how there would be no UN without such veto. Because, honestly, an agreement council where you can only agree as a group to do something if the big players don’t say otherwise to me looks like it just compounds the eternal problems we already have and is nothing more than just another flavour of “feel free to protest in a way that does not importunate me” Capitalism.
Wasn’t that why the League of Nations failed?
See league of nations.
US, China, Russia, France, and the UK have veto power over Security Council resolutions because they are the ones who are called upon to actually enforce Security Council resolutions.
if that were the argument, China, Russia, France and the UK could now act to enforce the resolution if the US is not doing it. After all, they have veto power too, right?
A veto means the resolution does not pass in the first place.
deleted by creator
U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood told the Security Council that the veto “does not reflect opposition to Palestinian statehood but instead is an acknowledgment that it will only come from direct negotiations between the parties.”
Fuck you Robert Wood!
I posed a question in another thread, but this one seems like it’s winning:
Who would represent Palestine if they had been accepted? Who can represent Palestine?
Well in a 2 state solution, you’d expect the Palestinians to be able to choose.
Unless we don’t want a 2 state solution.
Right. But wouldn’t they need a Palestine state before being eligible to join the UN? With unified leadership to represent them?
Seems like a prerequisite.
139 countries recognize Palestine as a state. Officially, they’re a non member observer state.
Which of their two “governments” is being represented though?
That’s putting the cart before the horse. You can’t say “you have to have conducted a general election before you become a nation state.”
That would be like telling a slave they can’t become a free person unless they’ve already got a job that pays them direct wages.
That’s not accurate. A UN recognition of nation state is not a pre requisite for self governance. FIFA recognizes more nations than the UN. If Taiwan can’t be recognized by the UN I don’t think there’s reasonable expectation for Palestine.
A UN recognition of nation state is not a pre requisite for self governance.
I’m not saying it is a prerequisite. Historically being free was not a prerequisite for being paid some kind of wage at times either, for that matter.
Historically, many former colonial nations gained their independence before being able to hold free and fair elections. Kenya for example, or South Africa.
Palestine is in a similar state at present.
PA, you know Gaza isn’t Palestine. Plus the two state is set at the founding of Israel, and both Israel and Palestine have equal rights to be represented in the UN.
It is another story that Israel is trying deliberately to undermine Palestinian rights and oppose any statehood. All the road blocks, checkpoints, walls, settlement etc. built and imposed to the Palestinian population are completely illegal according to international law, but again Israel backed by the US act with extreme impunity.
Why hasn’t PA held elections for 20 years or so?
Under this thought process, if Gaza isn’t Palestine, should the Palestinians’ state be recognized, what happens to Gaza? Is it absorbed into Israel? From what I can tell I don’t think this is gonna fly, almost anyone talking about this and the Gazans themselves don’t agree it seems
Never said that, What is a Palestinian territory is defined in 1948. Where it is clearly stated what should belong to Israel and what to Palestine.
I mean, that ship has sailed though right? Israel will never agree to that unless it’s destroyed.
I guess so, but Israel is acting like this because they have the US behind their back, and I am sure if this wasn’t the case they would not be so reckless and act with such impunity in the region and it is a failure of the US to rein them.
I’m not as sure of that as you are, but I hope we get to find out soon.
They’d probably have all been murdered by muslim fanatics without outside support, something I feel far roo many here would support.
You mean exactly what Israel is doing right now? Because they don’t seem fazed by the high civilian casualties or the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza.
The vote in the 15-member Security Council was 12 in favor, the United States opposed and two abstentions, from the United Kingdom and Switzerland. U.S. allies France, Japan and South Korea supported the resolution.
Pretty interesting
Reminder the US is an imperialist power that is evil.
Reminder anyone actually describing things as evil has the intellect of a child and no concept of reality
Wow your such an intellectual. So you wanna tell me rape, torture, genocide are all not evil? What about pedophilia? What the nazis did? Is that evil? Killing innocent civilians?
No they’re not 'evil t’hey’re heinous acts committed by humans, but what we’re really taking about is people and collections of people - they’re not some spiritual terror hellbent on causing pain they’re normal people with parents and likely children they love, friends and ambitions and hopes for the world.
Acting like things you don’t agree with are evil allows you to hate them without question, of course they must ve stopped they’re only trying to hurt people… and of course you shouldn’t bother to question your own team they’re good so a thing they do is justified in the fight against evil… which is how you become someone else’s evil.
Throw out childish bronze age notions of how reality works and sccept the complexity which is all around us and turns everything into a Grey area.
Taiwan can’t get recognized despite its government being a founding member of the UN and folks surprised it’s contentious for Palestine to be recognized?
This outcome was by no means surprising, especially as it was not Palestine’s first application for membership and the US has even vetoed resolutions calling for an immediate ceasefire in the conflict between Israel and Palestine on several occasions. The difference to your comparison, however, is that Israel itself, unlike China, has no right of veto in the UN Security Council.
To the surprise of absolutely no one
Of course the UN is a joke anyway, so it’s not like this really matters in any way.
Was curious what was the US’s perspective/reasoning behind not voting for it. From the article…
U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood told the Security Council that the veto “does not reflect opposition to Palestinian statehood but instead is an acknowledgment that it will only come from direct negotiations between the parties.”
The United States has “been very clear consistently that premature actions in New York — even with the best intentions — will not achieve statehood for the Palestinian people,” deputy State Department spokesman Vedant Patel said.
WTH
Taxation without representation?
Yup. The majority of the US people want the US government to stop being a lapdog for a fascist apartheid regime.
No amount of neoliberal party loyalists downvoting your true statement is going to change the fact that this means that the US government doesn’t faithfully represent its people.
