445
~70%of Americans want a cease fire. Another nail in the democracy coffin. Same thing in Canada less the veto. Our governments are beating to a different drum that is not the voice of the people they supposedly represent.
America is owned by AIPAC it's not a democracy.
In before the "Um AkShUaLlY iT's A rEpUbLiC nOt A dEmOcRaCy" drones that know what neither a democracy or a Republic is.
Where are you getting this 70% number from? Did they do a national vote on the topic? Or maybe it's just a pulling number you read somewhere and now parrot without source.
Hardly a nail in any coffin. This is exactly how representative democracy works. You vote for someone to represent you in the government. Those someone's collaborate to the best of their ability to make policies and decisions. Don't like their policies and decisions. Vote for someone else.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Correction. 70% of people no doubt prefer, in a very abstract way, that Israelis and Palestinians weren't killing each other. Because innocent civilians dying is bad. But 99% of people don't "want" a ceasefire if it involves even the slightest amount of effort or concession or cost on their part, nor do they want to dive into the complexities of the Middle East. The quality of that "want" is very, very low. It is more of an abstract preference, really.
Where did you get that 90% figure. Not going to disagree though as it is likely correct but the reality is it is already costing Americans money to not have a ceasefire so unsure your point.
There are lots and lots of polls about Americans wanting a cease fire which range in % but all around 70%. +- 10.
Americans in general have next to no understanding of how aid and funding works, so any poll taken about providing aid or funding is inherently worthless.
People are stupid. That's why they vote for shit like Trump, Brexit, and cutting military aid to allies.
Well…50% of the population is below average intelligence and they are easy to manipulate and thus are a force to recon.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Can't they all just...like...get along?"
load more comments
(3 replies)
It is my sincere hope that one day, the USA may gain Independence from Israel.
It's impossible for a politician to win if they criticize Israel.
But why though? This is literally the only thing that the GOP and democrats agree on and it's a totally dysfunctional level of allegiance to Israel above any other nation. It doesn't make sense. Bibi is a total douche and they are clearly committing war crimes over there. Hamas sucks but should we really be standing shoulder to shoulder with Israel on this one?
Nationally, currently yes. But not completely. Granted they are trying to smear and attack every Democrat that has. But I think Talib and others. Are relatively safe at their local level.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Gross
I feel like I'm in the twilight zone when people talk about this issue, like people watching all of this and still defending Israel are all living on another fucking planet. Some literally 1984 "war is peace/we've always been at war with East Asia" shit.
Remember all the countries that voted yes population and all these in the US and UK who don't agree with theirs government feel the same.
This is clearly a small interest group that own the US government and UK government and their military and these two will do anything to support thir interests regardless of what people want. It is a dictatorship but instead of one ruler you have a few rich people and companies...
Actual question: why in the fuck can the US veto actions by the UN? Can other countries veto as well? Or is it only the US that can do that with the implied threat we’d swing our militaristic dick around or something?
EDIT: Thank y’all for replying and informing me and any other readers about why this is a thing. You guys are da real MVPs 👊
The US is a part of the security council, which gets automatic veto power.
Yes, the other countries are China, France, Russia and the UK. These are the Security Counsel states of the UN, seen by many as a peace-keeping organization.
Wikipedia notes that
They also happen to be the nuclear-weapon states (NWS) under the terms of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Also on a completely unrelated note, here is the list of the top 5 arms dealers:
Source: SIPRI Arms Transfers Database
Generated: 09 December 2023
@Poggervania
All the states in this council can do it. But when you're a permanent member like US, it's much easier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council?wprov=sfla1
@return2ozma
I want you to think about how, when you posted this, jou were swearing and upset about this thing you admittedly knew nothing about.
That's your lizard brain swearing and reacting. Then your human brain took over and you asked good follow on questions.
load more comments
(6 replies)
I feel like there should be a limit on how many times a country can exercise their veto rights, at least.
US has a long history of single-handedly bullying entire UN with their veto power.
US gas a long history of single-handedly bullying entire UN with their veto power.
Many of the US's vetos would've been voted against by other countries and/or vetoed by France/UK if the US weren't there. The US is a convient country to take the fall.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Of fricking course.
Of course the US would
Come the fuck on. A UN resolution demanding a ceasefire is just symbolic anyway.
Not if it's from the security council. Security council resolutions are legally binding, whereas GA resolutions are more like suggestions.
This would matter if UN resolutions actually did anything
For anyone else wondering "why did the US veto it?" rather than jumping to an emotional reaction, the article explains the US's position:
U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood called the resolution “imbalanced” and criticized the council after the vote for its failure to condemn Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel in which the militants killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, or to acknowledge Israel’s right to defend itself. He declared that halting military action would allow Hamas to continue to rule Gaza and “only plant the seeds for the next war.”
“Hamas has no desire to see a durable peace, to see a two-state solution,” Wood said before the vote. “For that reason, while the United States strongly supports a durable peace, in which both Israelis and Palestinians can live in peace and security, we do not support calls for an immediate cease-fire.”
So some total bullshit.
the United States strongly supports a durable peace,
we do not support calls for an immediate cease-fire.”
Come the fuck on.
Hamas has no desire to see a durable peace, to see a two-state solution
Because Israel does? What a fucking joke. I'm so fucking embarrassed of this country and so fucking sick of being stuck in it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I'll translate for those that doesn't speak US foreign policy-ese.
"We fully support our pet genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state in their genocidal ventures."
load more comments
(8 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
445 points (96.6% liked)
News
21678 readers
3016 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS