• Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    ~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.

    • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        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.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          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.

        • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Obviously I made up the 99% figure as a rhetorical device mirroring the earlier 70% figure as a way of inserting my opinion about the nature of the 70% figure.

  • Poggervania@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    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 👊

      • Flyswat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        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

    • 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.

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Lmao you clearly don’t understand how the UN works, they’re part of the committee they all get to vote for or against

    • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      9 months ago

      Russia has been vetoing peacekeeping forces in Novorossiya since 2014, for example. China has been vetoing investigations into Uyghur genocide too. Also this particular resolution is fucking stupid as is the whole Arab-world sponsored money laundering machine of Palestine rights council of the UN. People don’t understand that “supporting Palestine” is literally the same as supporting Vova, Xi, Kim, Assad and Khamenei since they’re all the same totalitarian terrorist axis.

  • ZzyzxRoad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.

    • Doorbook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      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…

  • SheeEttin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    Come the fuck on. A UN resolution demanding a ceasefire is just symbolic anyway.

  • osarusan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    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.”

    • ZzyzxRoad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      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.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Because Israel does? What a fucking joke.

        It would be weird for them to offer so many two-state solutions if that’s not a thing they wanted.

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      “We will not be supporting a call for a full cease fire as it would allow the democratically elected government currently in charge to continue to be in charge, potentially jeopardizing the future peace”

      Putting aside the fact that I don’t think Hamas would win an election today (if they’d allow one), how is Israel not just as likely to break this “durable peace”.

      Calling for an end to violence on an immediate basis and being upset when your own government is again going against the will of it’s citizens, choosing to back a military that’s vastly superior to their enemies and barely even whispering a comment on the brutality they’re committing on the civilian population of their adversary, isn’t jumping to an emotional reaction because we all already figured that was the reason anyway

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        We will not be supporting a call for a full cease fire as it would allow the democratically elected government currently in charge to continue to be in charge

        Putting aside the fact that I don’t think Hamas would win an election today (if they’d allow one)

        You really wrote this out and thought it made sense.

        • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          In the same way Zeleneskyy isn’t going to hold elections at this time, I doubt Hamas would either, although I think the sentiment between the leader and their citizens are completely different between the two.

          There can be nuance here, I don’t LIKE that they were democratically elected and definitely took a greater grip than granted by that election, but this is the 57th time we’ve decided to assist in the deposition of a foreign power and government that, although I think are commitering terrible atrocities, only became so popular and so radicalized due to the mistreatment of their population by the Israeli government assisted by the financial and militaristic aid already given to them by the United States.

          People elect dictators all the time for all kinds of reasons, this one just happens to be deeply entrenched in our geopolitical expansion and security game and the harm inflicted on the citizens of palestine is partially our government’s fault and they and so many of us refuse to acknowledge that.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Hamas seized power because he PA was trying to form a secular state, as part of a two-state solution. Upon seizing power, they immediately canceled elections forever. Then, they stole aid money from their own people, blocked the UNRWA from distributing further aid (and did so again during this conflict) and forced them to teach genocide against Jews in schools. This is all in addition to torturing and murdering any Palestinian dissidents who oppose Hamas.

            Shit, during this very conflict, Hamas literally shot people fleeing south, because maximizing civilian casualties is a stated goal of theirs.

            There is nothing redeeming about Hamas.

  • ⚡⚡⚡@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I hope, this conflict ends at some point.

    But for it to end forever, Hamas needs to disappear. Their main goal is to destroy Israel.

    Otherwise, it’s just waiting for the next terroristic attack.

    It’s a shame that both sides haven’t used the previous years to solve the problem.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      The only way for Hamas to be eradicated at this point is complete genocide and total annexation. You can’t kill a someone’s entire family and not expect them to take up arms against you.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      🙄

      Israel is the 51st state. Everything Israel does is done with US support because they’re part of the same settler-colonial project.

  • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Maybe they should try demanding the full unconditional surrender of Hamas and the release of all hostages first…

  • Ullallulloo@civilloquy.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    Didn’t Hamas break the last two ceasefires? How does the UN expect to enforce such with a literal terrorist organization?

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      No israel violated the ceasefires right at the start by shooting civilians returning north.

      And israel was the party that refused to extend the ceasefire.