303
all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 62 points 1 year ago

"We believe we need to let that diplomacy play out."

Is that what we're calling it now?

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

does anyone know another word for complicit, I'm tired of saying it

[-] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago

Washington traditionally shields its ally Israel from any Security Council action.

The rest of the article is extra.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Came here to say this... The US has been doing this for decades.

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago

Of fucking course we did...

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 1 year ago

I understand why the first proposal from Russia was rejected, but this one should have been pretty uncontroversial. This is really a WTF moment for US diplomacy.

[-] BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf 11 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately not. If you’ve been paying attention, this aligns pretty well with their behavior in the past.

[-] ook_the_librarian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Saying it's status quo doesn't contradict how WTF it is.

[-] Faresh@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is really a WTF moment for US diplomacy.

Not really, considering the US's past actions and decisions, especially regarding Israel.

[-] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago

Oh but its a problem when Russia does it?

[-] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 8 points 1 year ago

Yeah, honestly the Superpower Vetoes have been the biggest flaw in the UN since its conception.

[-] BWchief117@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Call it a flaw if you want, but it is also probably contributing to no more world wars

[-] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 2 points 1 year ago

I think it's less effective than it could be with the ability to check world powers and their allies with financial incentives among other things.

[-] AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

The US would veto via military action if we couldn't veto by voting. It's a bad system, but better than going to war (more than we already do).

[-] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 2 points 1 year ago

And then they would face massive economic repercussions as the UN could vote against them for a change.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

No - they're why the UN exists.

The purpose of the UN is to prevent global war. The Security Council veto keeps the UN from taking sides in a military conflict against the interests of a county that can maintain that level of warfare.

[-] doctorcrimson@lemmy.today 2 points 1 year ago

Lmao

The UN was not created to maintain peace. They were the result of a massive conflict. The ability to give financial incentives for peace by restricting powerful nations would make the UN a thousand times more effective.

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

Don't forget we're the good guys, everyone!

[-] mundane@feddit.nu 6 points 1 year ago
[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 year ago

And waited until it was already clear that the Nazis we going to lose before entering the European theatre.

[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We are no strangers to genicides so no surprise here. How did Israel, founded by genicide survivers become the ones doing the genicide?! (rhetorical)

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Genocide, uh, finds a way.

From an evolutionary perspective, the history of life is made from genocides, with survivors riding on top. Everybody's fighting for their niche.

Similarly, the abrahamic religions compete for their access to the Holy Land.

[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Yes to

Genocide finds a way

But absolutely not to

life is made from genocides

Humanity reached its current level because way more cooperation and kindness than war and genicide. We are just predisposed to focusing on the bad things. No one notices someone that does small acts of kindness.

[-] Spzi@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

True. But if you zoom further out, it becomes genocides again. The rise of humans was only possible for the downfall of other species. The rise of human civilization spelled doom for many others.

Ok, genocide strictly only applies to other humans. Anyways the core idea remains: For one culture to spread, others have to give way.

No one notices someone that does small acts of kindness.

Sad, isn't it? History books are like a gallery of psychopaths grabbing for more and more power.

[-] LaLiLuLuCo@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

There's also a literal loophole in the regional morality system where once hostages are taken almost everyone is down to start war criming.

[-] autotldr 13 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The vote on the Brazilian-drafted text was twice delayed in the past couple of days as the United States tries to broker aid access to Gaza.

Ambassador Zhang Jun accused the United States of leading council members to believe that the resolution could be adopted after it did not comment or express opposition during negotiations.

Thomas-Greenfield said the United States was disappointed the draft resolution made no mention of Israel's rights of self defense and she blamed Hamas for the Gaza humanitarian crisis.

The draft resolution also urged Israel - without naming it - to rescind its order for civilians and U.N. staff in Gaza to move to the south of the Palestinian enclave and condemns "the terrorist attacks by Hamas."

It has vowed to annihilate Hamas after the Islamist militant group killed 1,400 people and seized hostages in an Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

The draft U.N. resolution condemned all violence and hostilities against civilians and all acts of terrorism and called for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.


The original article contains 518 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 67%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Annoyed_Crabby@monyet.cc 9 points 1 year ago

"We are on the ground doing the hard work of diplomacy," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, told the 15-member council after the vote. "We believe we need to let that diplomacy play out."

"Yes, resolutions are important. And yes, this council must speak out. But the actions we take must be informed by the facts on the ground and support direct diplomacy efforts. That can save lives. The council needs to get this right," she said.

US not only want to play hero, they want to play THE hero it seems.

[-] febra@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Russia veto: GENOCIDAL MANIACS

US veto: Go Go Israel <3

[-] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We need a new UN without the US. It is only there as Israel's PR spokesman.

[-] DoomBot5@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Can we also get rid of all the Arabic countries passing countless resolutions about Israel in the UN? Pretending they don't have a bias is like pretending SA is a bastion of women's rights.

[-] filister@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It is not like Israel has been a human-rights role-model. You can open whichever human rights watch group and see what they think about it, or Wikipedia.

And the whole reason Israel exists as a country is thanks to the UN.

[-] jalda@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 year ago

Ah, yes. those Arabic countries like *checks notes* Brazil

[-] metaStatic@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

I'm shocked. Shocked. Well not that shocked.

[-] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

I'm not clear on what the action proposed to do. I read both the article and the bot summary. Sort of lost on the jargon I guess. Could anyone explain, perhaps with a quote?

[-] octatron@lmy.drundo.com.au 2 points 1 year ago

Time to kick the US to the curb. Fuck em and their Christian BS. Do what must be done rest of the world. Permanent trade sanctions for Israel!

[-] octatron@lmy.drundo.com.au 2 points 1 year ago

Time to kick the US to the curb. Fuck em and their Christian BS. Do what must be done rest of the world. Permanent trade sanctions for Israel!

[-] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social -4 points 1 year ago

This article glosses over why the US officials representing USA vetoed and this kind of journalism sucks fat cock, so I'm going to claim my own made up reason and you all have to agree with it; USA vetoes due to the Uzbekistan official sitting nearby not share this mornings apple sauce cup at their UN daycare.

[-] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 year ago

So why are US officials really vetoing these? Is there like, a better article? You got a hunch? I'll take anything. Well except a morning without applesauce.

[-] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago

My uneducated thoughts are that because Hamas are too embedded into Palestinian society and have essentially infiltrated every aspect of their government, the correct strategic maneuver is to eliminate the Palestinian government and install another puppet government as a replacement in order to destroy Hamas.

They cannot do this without carte blanche approval from the major world superpowers to invade and target civilians who are involved in Islamic terrorism. The ultimate goal, I believe is to absorb more land into Israel and deny Palestinians Gaza completely by the next decade.

Again, this is my uneducated thoughts.

[-] Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 1 year ago

... You might wanna do some more reading. This take is hot like lava from a volcano.

this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2023
303 points (96.9% liked)

World News

39023 readers
2343 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS