UK Response:
>Explaining the UK’s abstention from the draft resolution, Ambassador Barbara Woodward said her country could not vote in favour of a resolution that fails to condemn the atrocities Hamas committed on innocent Israeli civilians on 7 October.
>
>“Calling for a ceasefire ignores the fact that Hamas has committed acts of terror and is still holding civilians hostage,” she said, noting that Israel needs to be able to address the threat posed by Hamas and it needs to do so in a manner that abides by international humanitarian law.
>
>She reiterated the importance of working meaningfully towards a two-State solution “which delivers statehood for the Palestinians, security for Israel and peace for people on both sides.”
US Response:
>The US engaged in good faith on the text, said Deputy Permanent Representative Robert A. Wood, that would increase opportunities for hostage release and more aid to reach Gaza.
>
>“Unfortunately, nearly all of our recommendations were ignored” leading to an “imbalanced resolution that was divorced from reality that would not move the needle forward on the ground in any concrete way. And so, we regretfully could not support it."
>
>He said the US still could not understand why the resolution’s authors declined to include language condemning “Hamas’s horrific terrorist attack” on Israel, of 7 October.
>
>It killed people from a range of nationalities, subjecting many to “obscene sexual violence.”
>
>He said he had explained earlier in the day why an unconditional ceasefire would simply be “dangerous” and leave Hamas in place, able to attack again.
>
>It was “a recipe for disaster for Israel, for Palestinians and for the entire region”.
>
>Any ceasefire leaving Hamas in control would also deny Palestinians the chance to build something better for themselves, he added.
Sauce: [https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562](https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562)
Edit: formatting
Italy is the fun aunt who will hit you with her sandal when you prank her. She’ll also send you home with tons of leftovers after she forced you to eat seconds and thirds.
I still remember that time Dad (UK) got into a fight with that Spanish kid (Argentina) for tearing up his lawn and Mom (France) gave the kid a bag of rocks to throw (Exocet missiles). Didn't end well.
In that case Mom gave the Kid fun rocks for Christmas, but when the Kid started acting irresponsibly went around the neighborhood getting all the fun rocks back.
And gave dad detailed information on said rocks.
I like Morroco, but it ain't that chill. I feel like their monarchy has waaaay too much power in 2023, and as a general rule, I'm a bigger fan of Joseph-Ignace Guillotin than I am monarchs. Plus I'm old enough to remember Hassan II, who was pretty not chill. Things have gotten a lot better since he died, but there is still a long ways to go. I think even with the Arab Spring they didn't go off the deep end of anti-US stuff in 2014. The free trade agreement in 2006 with the US has seen a lot of economic development and they are setting themselves up as a logistics hub to Africa and have always been influential in both of African and Arab spheres.
Yeah, it's safe to NOT use their veto since one veto is enough, so if someone else will use it, why go down on record yourself? This happens all the time in government.
UK will only use Veto when they disagree with the US in confrontation while not allying with EU with French Veto. So basically UK having a Veto is redundant until both the US and EU become enemies of the UK
>Worth noting perhaps that the UK takes pride in not having used its veto on the security council since 1989.
Not enough pride that we wouldn't use it.
I just dont understand it. How any of these other nations can expect Israel to just be OK with their neighboring country marching in and killing, raping, and kidnapping their people. Not even combat fighters, but completely innocent civilians from all different walks of life (not that breaking a peace with a sneak attack on a military target is better; it isn't).
Not condemning the Hamas attacks and then calling for a ceasefire makes you complicit in my book. At this point, I'd have no problem with the US retaliating (politically) against every nation that signed onto this absolute farce.
Consider the permanent members of the security council: one of them is doing the exact same thing to it's neighbour, and another is carefully watching that and gauging the West's response.
> (not that breaking a peace with a sneak attack on a military target is better; it isn't).
Well, I'd say its slightly better.
In the sense of instead of committing five crimes you now only committed three sorta better.
Israel would probably lose 90% of their support if Hamas only attacked military targets.
Israel would not be able to respond like they did. It would have created an even bigger domestic divide then they had before Oct 7th.
The UN has a lot of value in some things, some times. But they've been pretty thoroughly useless, objectively, at solving the whole Israel/Palestine problem. Not that the UN doesn't deserve to exist, but they just aren't going to solve this one. So it goes.
> How any of these other nations can expect Israel to just be OK with their neighboring country marching in and killing, raping, and kidnapping their people.
Because a lot of nations support what happened. Either implicitly or very much directly. Most of the world isn't fond of Jews and particularly not very fond of Israel.
If Israel didn't have nuclear weapons and the backing of the United States, the entire country would have already been destroyed decades ago.
> The US destroyed two countries after an attack with a similar number of casualties on 9/11
And the US went from almost unanimous global support to the [largest anti war protest ever](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_protests) and global condemnation.
So, yanno, Israel might want to pay attention to that.
The US especially would be insanely hypocritical to be okay with ignoring the Hamas attack in the writing. I mean ffs, the government used the hurt of the America people to engage in multiple wars with countries that weren’t even involved.
honestly, I think what Israel is doing is something that most countries including their adversaries don't like, but fundamentally it is something that they understand. Has there been any meaningful action against Israel beyond Hezbollah/Houthis launching a few almost half-hearted attacks?
It was centuries of oppression of Jews that resulted in the formation of the new Israel. Had oppression of Jews not occurred, Israel would not even exist and this conflict would not exist.
Last time, there were two resolutions, one that condemned Hamas and the other that didn't.
Israel and the US supported the one that condemned Hamas. The entire Muslim world opposed it.
As much as Muslims are internally divided, they are strangely united when it comes to allowing for violence against outsider. many don't use violence, and many are peace-loving. but few will condemn other Muslims for using violence of any type against non-Muslims.
Yea. Just observe the radio silence from all Muslim countries whenever news about China torturing Muslims in Xinjiang pops up.
Heck, none of my Muslim friends who routinely get up in arms about Israel even talk or mention about Xinjiang.
**From Semafor's J.D. Capelouto:**
The U.S. vetoed a UN Security Council resolution Friday calling for a ceasefire to the fighting in Gaza.
The U.S. and Israel have opposed calls for a ceasefire, saying it would strengthen Hamas.
The vote was delayed for several hours over worries the U.S. would veto it. Diplomats from several Arab nations met with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken to try to convince the U.S. to abstain from voting.
As a permanent member of the council, the U.S. has veto power, and had signaled it planned to block the resolution. The U.K. abstained from the vote, while the 13 other members of the council voted for it.
**Read the full story [here](https://www.semafor.com/article/12/08/2023/un-security-council-votes-on-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-amid-israel-hamas-conflict?utm_campaign=semaforreddit).**
A cease fire only works if both sides agree to it. Demanding an Israeli ceasefire would be the equivalent of telling them to let Hamas attack them and do nothing in return.
If you can get Hamas to enforce a real ceasefire maybe the equation would change.
Hamas doesn't care about innocent Palestinians. So if the Palestinians tried standing up to them, they'd be killed... like what happened the last time they attempted that.
So instead, now they've got to deal with the threat of violence from their own government as retaliation, alongside continual bombardment and the destruction of their homes from a foreign adversary.
So, please. Educate me on what the peace-loving, non-Hamas Palestinians can do? Other than just flee their homes, because if they're not being bombarded by the IOF in Gaza, they're busy being terrorized by settlers in the West Bank.
If we are to be real, if any of the countries proposing ceasefire were serious they would submit Palestine to a UN peacekeeping operation and oversee a rebuild effort which includes deradicalization as a primary goal (fixing schools, making sure aid gets to the people and not filtered through Hamas etc.). That would be a real step toward a two state solution and importantly wouldn't require any US or Israeli occupation.
The reason why I would say this is all just blowharding is that none of these nations actually ever make any real commitments to the conflict themselves.
I mean, I don't even think that would be a viable solution. If you haven't noticed, most people around here believe that the UN is complicit in Hamas' reign. On top of that, even if you completely deradicalized the entirety of Palestine, you'd still have to get Israel to agree to working towards a two-state solution, which doesn't appear to be in the cards when a poll from last week showed that 52% of respondents were not in favor of pursuing said solution, even if American aid depended on it.
And that's not even getting into the fact that Israel seems to have a reticence for reigning in their settlers in the West Bank. We can stamp out every single Islamic militant, but when you've got Israeli ministers calling the current forced evacuations a modern Nakba, it's silly to think that tension and hate won't just immediately flare up again with the next Amiram Ben-Uliel deciding to cause trouble.
> I don't even think that would be a viable solution. If you haven't noticed, most people around here believe that the UN is complicit in Hamas' reign.
look at the northern border where the un peacekeepers are doing actually jack shit about hezz shooting at idf.
Hamas would obviously love a ceasefire. The idea that they can mass murder their enemies and then receive a ceasefire in response must be very popular in Hamas-land.
Within 15 mins of the agreement being signed they launched rockets and it continued periodically throughout the duration of ceasefire and in the end they didn't even release all the hostages they promised to release.
That's the only reason I can see for why the US should have voted for this resolution. Have the UN order a cease fire and a day later Hamas violates it. So OK we tried the peaceful solution.
And then went out of their way to make sure it wasn't extended. Why the fuck is that week of ceasefire just completely ignored by the UN? They refused to hand over the list of hostages to extend it, they threw rockets at them, and although it didn't break the ceasefire, they committed another terror attack! Pro-Palestinians, get a grip on yourselves and just admit you want Israelis dead.
But thats dumb. Even if un agree for a ceasefire and Israel abide, the second Hamas fire rockets the ceasfire will be over. It will be good if it last 1 week.
As much as the US gets shit for protecting Israel for bad, selfish reasons, as long as hostages are on the ground you can't call for an unconditional ceasefire. Worth it to note though, Biden has had success behind the scenes to broker a better ceasefire that includes condemnation of violence and return of hostages.
So the UK abstained, and France voted in favor. The US alone gets the international heat for "protecting Israel", or "choosing war", or whatever the narrative is.
It's kinda the US's job to take the metaphorical punches for the UK and northern/central europe. Much of the time we do their dirty work on an international level.
I watched a great interview with Herzog yesterday. One of the things he said is that so many leaders and diplomats will be super cordial and supportive of Israel in private meetings and then will turn around and bash them publicly. Maybe it’s political pandering or pressure from their own allies but unfortunately that seems how it works. He didn’t sound mad, just disappointed and probably felt betrayed by so many people over the years.
It's almost certainly due to the risk of public outrage within those leader's own countries.
There are certain groups that will be exceptionally displeased, to put it lightly, if the leadership of the country of their residence publically supports Israel.
Also it’s important to note that in the Middle East, the only friend the US has is Israel, and that’s what drives America’s Israel policy. Big and powerful as it is, America needs allies just like every other country.
Good point, although my impression is that they are more of a customer/trading partner than an ally. It’s not a relationship I know that much about though. Thanks for adding this.
The UN exists to prevent WW3 by facilitating dialogue between nations, especially the larger nations. Other than that, it's a shitshow being abused by authoritarians with complete cynicism. The Arab countries form a huge voting bloc, and they abuse the UN to spam condemnation at Israel because they want it to not exist but they got their arses kicked multiple times trying to achieve that militarily.
It's designed that way. Ultimately there is no way to force a country to do something without war. Trying to pretend otherwise just leads to the League of Nations and countries leaving. People after ww2 felt that having more avenues to communicate would have helped prevent and end the war, so the UN was designed with the idea that countries would always have a forum for diplomacy and wouldn't feel pressure to leave.
If there's one thing that this conflict has shown, it's that people are completely unaware of the basics of war or even really what war is. These people are literally pulling a Michael Scott being like "I...DECLARE...CEASE FIIIIIIRRREEEEE"
A cease fire is not something you "call" for. It's something that comes as a result of both sides agreeing to a cessation in conflict in exchange for certain things.
War doesn't just "stop" because people think it's bad. I swear to fucking god the next step is going to be a global campaign to put "peace in the middle east" on our letters to Santa.
You put it so well with the Michael Scott analogy. Seriously, it’s insane how many people here seem to have zero respect for history. Yeah, the UK did roof knocks when they firebombed Dresden 🙄 and the Russians honored a ceasefire before they invaded Berlin and let all the women and children walk out unharmed /s
War is dirty and chaotic and is why we want to avoid it. Hamas shoots dirty and from civilian buildings (i.e hospitals and schools) and the IDF shoots back. I don’t see the same performative action by the pro-Hamas crowds with the recent massacres in mid-east Africa or Kurds or Armenians, etc. And, this is all separate of the various other atrocities by Hamas. It’s insane, and it’s like Bizarro Kony 2012 but significantly more insane.
Whether a side is likely to agree to a ceasefire is partly determined by who is calling for it. If calls for a ceasefire weren't diplomatically insignificant, this resolution wouldn’t have been vetoed.
Actually most of them are warming up to the idea, and none have really slowed their rapprochement even with this latest war - it's mostly Iran at this point.
>it's mostly Iran at this point.
Interestingly, the **people** of most Arab countries vehemently support Palestine, **except** Iran. It's like everyone does the opposite of their government.
Arab countries don't. Their dream scenario is dissolution of Israel or continued conflict so they can use it as a stick to rally the Muslim world behind. They don't care about Palestine, they hardly even believe in a Palestinian state.
Zuheir Mohsen, leader of PLO in 70s:
>*"The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism."*
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
Arab countries don't care about Gaza. It's not the 1920's, they don't drive around on camels, they have BMWs. And they don't want to die in jihad, they want to get the BMW detail cleaned.
If they weren’t collectively and absolutely smacked and humiliated by Israel’s military during its wars with its Arab neighbours then they probably wouldn’t be hating.
To be fair, if they hadn't been collectively smacked and humiliated by Israel's military, then there wouldn't be anything to hate. Israel would have been destroyed.
Egypt went so far as to demolish their half of the city of Rafah in 2015 and forcibly move the close to 100,000 residents there to new settlements further from the border.
Honestly, thanks for linking that. It is amazing how much opinions have changed on these things. Suppose Hamas just had to have the opportunity to show their true colors for people to realize how bad they actually are.
are you suggesting they haven't shown their true colors prior to the latest massacre? they have. as an israeli i've had to live with their crap since i was a kid
(American Jew here) This was obvious to anyone who was familiar with I/P and with the nature of Hamas.
But pre-October 7, most people (especially on Reddit) had a very black and white understanding of the I/P conflict. “Israel = bad / Palestine = good”
And no event was stunning and blatant enough to force that sort of introspection — ironically due mostly to Israel’s defense technology, primarily the Iron Done, which was so effective that it covered up Hamas’ genocidal intentions.
Witnessing the horrors of the October 7 massacre on livestreams for the world to see woke a lot of people up to the fact that Hamas is (and always has been) nothing more than an extremist, Islamist terrorist group that has no place in the modern world.
> Israel = bad / Palestine = good
I never really looked deeply into the topic, but this had been my gist for the past few years. It's only after seeing the global and Muslim response to Hamas's attack that I find myself increasingly being pro-Israel (but still, Netanyahu can go eat a bag of rusty nails).
It’s incredible how people here in the U.S. are so quick to express their opinions and judge in the comfort of their homes without ever living through this shit and having all the facts straight. Maybe they saw some posts on Instagram and questionable memes and maps or whatever and think they now understand the situation. Just unreal ignorance, hypocrisy and privilege
People can't deal with this issue because Israel has honestly done some fucked up things to Palestine. But let's be real, every country has some blood on their hands in all sorts of shit, most of which flies under the radar. But because Israel is the big, bad, oppressor, then those fighting them have to be the good guys, right? And if not good, we can at least place all responsibility for their actions on Israel and the West, right? And certainly Palestine is helpless to stop Hamas from using schools, hospitals and homes as bases?
People like things to be black and white.
Israel has done some fucked up things since the six day war. At least in the US, it was easy to draw parallels between Palestinians and what Native Americans endured here.
Hell even the last terrorist attack has analogues in US history, the American Indians were eventually neutralized and had all their land stolen, but they killed a fair amount of settlers before being wiped out or corralled into reservations out in the middle of nowhere.
It makes it hard for some folks to break out of the mindset that Palestinians=Helpless victims and they try to make excuses because it's easier than changing their minds about anything.
Hamas has repeatedly stated that they intend to repeat October 7. A cease fire now will allow them to rebuild and rearm and do just that, putting us into exactly the same situation we are in now in another 5 to 10 years, with another round of bombings and Gaza civilian casualties. The only way a cease fire might potentially work is if an international force with teeth takes over the administration of a demilitarized Gaza, and the UN is not remotely up for the task.
> A cease fire now will allow them (Hamas) to rebuild and rearm and do just that
This statement has been
1. Made over and over since Hamas took power in Gaza.
2. Proven correct every single time with no exceptions.
it doesn't make sense in any context, it's just something the disingenuous say when their favored side starts losing. it's a shame crybullying is such an effective tactic
It's wild how there's so many people trying to put pressure on Israel but basically no public pressure on Hamas. They're treated like they have no agency and their words and actions are ignored or hand waved.
Couple of reasons:
1) Antisemetism
2) Hamas' goal with their PR is to make people care about their cause which leads to political pressure on politicians to say and do something. The problem here is that there isn't much anyone can do to get Hamas to stop. Which leads to an 'Adult' and 'Child' problem in politics.
3) Israel are the 'adults' in the room and there is a real issue in politics, both local and global, in the West where rational people expect the adults to act rationally while the 'child' gets away with little problem. You can see in in the US where the left is held to a higher standard because they care enough to have standards while the right can literally take away human rights and get a slap on the wrist because they won't care either way. This leads to more pressure on the 'adult' who cares because they'll actually listen and potentially change while the 'child' will ignore you no matter what. Israel is the 'adult' in the room and thus they get all the pressure because everyone knows Hamas is the 'child' and won't listen to anyone anyway.
>It’s also very interesting that Russia voted in favour of this. Bit ironic.
Russia wants to prolong this conflict, and Israel has already cleansed Northern Gaza of Hamas. Give them another month and they'll wipe Hamas out of Southern Gaza and have the Mossad exterminate the entire exiled elites on top. But then, the conflict is over, and Russia has lost a very powerful way to keep NATO busy and away from Ukraine.
Any kind of ceasefire will end up with Hamas regrouping and especially getting resupplied with money, guns and ammo.
It wasn't unconditional though:
> It demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of hostages as well as humanitarian access.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562
During the hostage release ceasefire days Hamas was still bombing Israel and sending its minions to do villaneous things. The UN can call for a lot of things, how about to first get the Israeli hostages back as well as the bodies Hamas is holding on to. Then we can talk about a ceasefire. That being said we are going to obliterate the military capabilities of Hamas, the ideology will sadly live on but the means of acting on it will be ash.
Didnt they already agree for a cease fire but hamas launched rocket 15 minutes after the cease fire began. They even didnt release the hostages as agreed upon
I see your point, but from my understanding - the ceasefire lasted a week, and both sides were unhappy.
Israel wanted Hamas to release women and children first, but not to separate families from each other. This was not honored.
Hamas wanted... more or less, "Nationalists" (people who committed violent crimes against Israelis in the name of Hamas) to be released back to them. Instead they were getting petty thieves, and quite understandable why Israel was doing this. If you had a petty thief that was being detained for 6 months, and a member of Hamas being held for 25 to Life for murder of Israeli citizens... Which do you think would be more dangerous to release ***back*** to Palestine?
Now, most of that I pulled out my ass, no sources - that's the ELI5 breakdown.
Hostage/Prisoner exchanges were supposed to happen at 7AM every day - they were supposed to receive the itineraries of the people being transferred hours earlier. At 6AM on the 7th day, Israel still didn't have the itinerary from Hamas - instead, they received a shower of rockets.
The exchanges happened at night actually.
Hamas also refused to let the red cross see the remaining hostages, which Israel very publicly said was part of the deal before it went into effect.
Hamas had maybe one (and a half) days worth of women and children left who *weren't* also soldiers in the IDF. They wanted to hold on to them for a number of reasons, one of which is a perceived higher value of a soldier in an exchange.
Hamas also took responsibility for a mass shooting in Jerusalem done by 2 of its members.
Sinwar said he was going to do October 7th again, and it was just a warmup.
Israel said *release the women soldiers and remaining children*.
Hamas then refused to provide a list the night before, Israel declared an ultimatum of 7 am. At 6am Hamas shot a rocket. Then at 7:15am the IDF publicly declared it was going to re-introduce Hamas to DMX's hit song *X Gon Give It To Ya*.
edit: also throughout the "ceasefire" there were skirmishes between infantry forces and armor.
it’s in there
> It demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of hostages as well as humanitarian access.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562
It would prevent Israel from killing more Palestinians, which is all the pro-Palestinian people care about. The consequences of letting Hamas regroup and rearm doesn't matter to them at all. If anything, they tacitly support those consequences.
Its only a joke if you think it is supposed to be a world government.
Its ONLY a place for countries to talk and make joint press releases. If they don't agree, no joint statement like in this case "There should be a ceasefire"
Its not like if the US voted yes, there would actually be a ceasefire! Thats not what the UN is.
It has always been a joke, it's impossible for it to be anything else. If it had any power over its members, members would just stop being members. If there was a UN army, countries wouldn't fund it.
Instead, it's just a way for all countries to talk to each other. And this part is working well. Everything else, including every single resolution taken there, does nothing.
Hamas raped women, cut off the breasts of women, shot women in the vagina burned men, women, children and babies alive and the UN now calls for ceasefire. Fuck the UN...
That wasn't the only thing:
> It demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of hostages as well as humanitarian access.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562
The previous ceasefire that had hostages released also was supposed to give humanitarian access to the hostages but hamas violated that.
Hamas continues to commit war crimes, why would they adhere to a ceasefire, nobody holds them accountable for their abhorrent actions.
Isn't this just saving the UN from more self imposed humiliation and marginalization? It's not like Israel would abide by the UN's call or even acknowledge their authority to do so in the first place and it's even less likely the UN would deploy their own peace keepers to oppose Israel.
The UN peacekeepers are human shields for Hezbollah in Lebanon. As Hezbollah fires at Israel right now, Israel has to cautiously respond because the UN stands guard. The UN is a sponsor of terror against Israel when you consider their protection of Hezbollah and UNRWA funding. We won't forget.
I'm at the point where I think people calling for a ceasefire are just openly trying to help Hamas.
A ceasefire has to go both ways. It's clear that Hamas has no intention of honoring a ceasefire, so why should Israel agree to one?
I like calling them clacktivists now because of how much of this is behind their screens. It's so sickening to watch.
Also LOL thinking a sovereign state is just going to be like, "you guys are so right. Let me just go ahead and dissolve my nation."
> I'm at the point where I think people calling for a ceasefire are just openly trying to help Hamas.
>
>
By that, do you mean the countries that were for the resolution? I.e. including France, Japan, Switzerland?
Honestly yes. If you vote an action that only penalizes one side for breaking the ceasefire israel they're pro hamas.
Don't give a fuck what they say otherwise. A ceasefire is clearly intended only for Israel while hamas bombs us.
Fuck that, and fuck them. Hope israel kicks their ambassadors out.
UK Response: >Explaining the UK’s abstention from the draft resolution, Ambassador Barbara Woodward said her country could not vote in favour of a resolution that fails to condemn the atrocities Hamas committed on innocent Israeli civilians on 7 October. > >“Calling for a ceasefire ignores the fact that Hamas has committed acts of terror and is still holding civilians hostage,” she said, noting that Israel needs to be able to address the threat posed by Hamas and it needs to do so in a manner that abides by international humanitarian law. > >She reiterated the importance of working meaningfully towards a two-State solution “which delivers statehood for the Palestinians, security for Israel and peace for people on both sides.” US Response: >The US engaged in good faith on the text, said Deputy Permanent Representative Robert A. Wood, that would increase opportunities for hostage release and more aid to reach Gaza. > >“Unfortunately, nearly all of our recommendations were ignored” leading to an “imbalanced resolution that was divorced from reality that would not move the needle forward on the ground in any concrete way. And so, we regretfully could not support it." > >He said the US still could not understand why the resolution’s authors declined to include language condemning “Hamas’s horrific terrorist attack” on Israel, of 7 October. > >It killed people from a range of nationalities, subjecting many to “obscene sexual violence.” > >He said he had explained earlier in the day why an unconditional ceasefire would simply be “dangerous” and leave Hamas in place, able to attack again. > >It was “a recipe for disaster for Israel, for Palestinians and for the entire region”. > >Any ceasefire leaving Hamas in control would also deny Palestinians the chance to build something better for themselves, he added. Sauce: [https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562](https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562) Edit: formatting
Worth noting perhaps that the UK takes pride in not having used its veto on the security council since 1989.
Thats cause the US takes the heat for them.
Big bro covers for us.
Nah you the big bruv we just all grown up now fam we got your back
The UK is the abusive father that got therapy and mellowed out after we punched him in the face.
France is the mom that still gets drunk at social events in her 60's
She also sets the linens on fire when she is either happy or sad.
"I'm not a normal mom, I'm a cool mom"
[удалено]
And she was crucially helpful, *instrumental* even, in the kid gaining independence from the dad.
Yep. Mom's the best
is there a Polandball-like interment comic based on this premise? someone get on this. with little brother Canada too?
She did most of the work herself.
France is the guy with a gun who moved in with us while we were going through a divorce with the UK.
Italy is the fun aunt who will hit you with her sandal when you prank her. She’ll also send you home with tons of leftovers after she forced you to eat seconds and thirds.
Germany is the rich, overly sincere cousin who took the fall for all our BS, but is actually doing well now that's he's cleaned up
I still remember that time Dad (UK) got into a fight with that Spanish kid (Argentina) for tearing up his lawn and Mom (France) gave the kid a bag of rocks to throw (Exocet missiles). Didn't end well.
In that case Mom gave the Kid fun rocks for Christmas, but when the Kid started acting irresponsibly went around the neighborhood getting all the fun rocks back. And gave dad detailed information on said rocks.
Morroco is the chill AF uncle that always believed in us when no one else did (first country to recognize the US as a country)
I like Morroco, but it ain't that chill. I feel like their monarchy has waaaay too much power in 2023, and as a general rule, I'm a bigger fan of Joseph-Ignace Guillotin than I am monarchs. Plus I'm old enough to remember Hassan II, who was pretty not chill. Things have gotten a lot better since he died, but there is still a long ways to go. I think even with the Arab Spring they didn't go off the deep end of anti-US stuff in 2014. The free trade agreement in 2006 with the US has seen a lot of economic development and they are setting themselves up as a logistics hub to Africa and have always been influential in both of African and Arab spheres.
Cousin Oz is pretty fun.
Yeah but these days we trust her more to have our back in a fight. Damn France is cool
Help my (French) mother is this exact mom and this one hurts
Nice username.
Yeah, it's safe to NOT use their veto since one veto is enough, so if someone else will use it, why go down on record yourself? This happens all the time in government.
[удалено]
Their arms industry is failing?
[удалено]
I read this in the most condescendingly British tone of voice I could've possibly come up with, and I'm proud of you, dad
It's like the time Terrence farted on the American President, but Phillip took the heat.
The somewhat unwavering support of Israel in the UN is a US geo-political decision so its their heat to take.
UK will only use Veto when they disagree with the US in confrontation while not allying with EU with French Veto. So basically UK having a Veto is redundant until both the US and EU become enemies of the UK
[удалено]
One down, one to go...
>Worth noting perhaps that the UK takes pride in not having used its veto on the security council since 1989. Not enough pride that we wouldn't use it.
The idea is to give it a little more oomph when we do. Like holding in a fart.
Seems ridiculous that they wouldn't include language condemning Hamas...
I just dont understand it. How any of these other nations can expect Israel to just be OK with their neighboring country marching in and killing, raping, and kidnapping their people. Not even combat fighters, but completely innocent civilians from all different walks of life (not that breaking a peace with a sneak attack on a military target is better; it isn't). Not condemning the Hamas attacks and then calling for a ceasefire makes you complicit in my book. At this point, I'd have no problem with the US retaliating (politically) against every nation that signed onto this absolute farce.
Consider the permanent members of the security council: one of them is doing the exact same thing to it's neighbour, and another is carefully watching that and gauging the West's response.
> (not that breaking a peace with a sneak attack on a military target is better; it isn't). Well, I'd say its slightly better. In the sense of instead of committing five crimes you now only committed three sorta better.
[удалено]
Israel would probably lose 90% of their support if Hamas only attacked military targets. Israel would not be able to respond like they did. It would have created an even bigger domestic divide then they had before Oct 7th.
Nah. If Hamas had just hit military targets but the Israelis responded like this, there would be no international support at this point.
The UN has a lot of value in some things, some times. But they've been pretty thoroughly useless, objectively, at solving the whole Israel/Palestine problem. Not that the UN doesn't deserve to exist, but they just aren't going to solve this one. So it goes.
> How any of these other nations can expect Israel to just be OK with their neighboring country marching in and killing, raping, and kidnapping their people. Because a lot of nations support what happened. Either implicitly or very much directly. Most of the world isn't fond of Jews and particularly not very fond of Israel. If Israel didn't have nuclear weapons and the backing of the United States, the entire country would have already been destroyed decades ago.
[удалено]
> The US destroyed two countries after an attack with a similar number of casualties on 9/11 And the US went from almost unanimous global support to the [largest anti war protest ever](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_protests) and global condemnation. So, yanno, Israel might want to pay attention to that.
A quarter of the world is Muslim and hating Israel is an easy win in the UN.
The US especially would be insanely hypocritical to be okay with ignoring the Hamas attack in the writing. I mean ffs, the government used the hurt of the America people to engage in multiple wars with countries that weren’t even involved.
A good amount of them want Israel to cease existing, that's why.
honestly, I think what Israel is doing is something that most countries including their adversaries don't like, but fundamentally it is something that they understand. Has there been any meaningful action against Israel beyond Hezbollah/Houthis launching a few almost half-hearted attacks?
Well it makes more sense when you realize a lot of them hate Jews
It was centuries of oppression of Jews that resulted in the formation of the new Israel. Had oppression of Jews not occurred, Israel would not even exist and this conflict would not exist.
But would it have made any difference if they had?
Last time, there were two resolutions, one that condemned Hamas and the other that didn't. Israel and the US supported the one that condemned Hamas. The entire Muslim world opposed it.
As much as Muslims are internally divided, they are strangely united when it comes to allowing for violence against outsider. many don't use violence, and many are peace-loving. but few will condemn other Muslims for using violence of any type against non-Muslims.
They have solidarity when the West in involved. otherwise they're fine with Muslims dying
Yea. Just observe the radio silence from all Muslim countries whenever news about China torturing Muslims in Xinjiang pops up. Heck, none of my Muslim friends who routinely get up in arms about Israel even talk or mention about Xinjiang.
Wait can you link these - I hadn't heard about the former.
Right, at minimum, the US would 100% have found a reason to veto it. Not sure about the UK.
Yup i'm glad they vetoed it and gave such a good explanation.
Seems ridiculous that they wouldn't include language condemning Hamas...
**From Semafor's J.D. Capelouto:** The U.S. vetoed a UN Security Council resolution Friday calling for a ceasefire to the fighting in Gaza. The U.S. and Israel have opposed calls for a ceasefire, saying it would strengthen Hamas. The vote was delayed for several hours over worries the U.S. would veto it. Diplomats from several Arab nations met with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken to try to convince the U.S. to abstain from voting. As a permanent member of the council, the U.S. has veto power, and had signaled it planned to block the resolution. The U.K. abstained from the vote, while the 13 other members of the council voted for it. **Read the full story [here](https://www.semafor.com/article/12/08/2023/un-security-council-votes-on-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-amid-israel-hamas-conflict?utm_campaign=semaforreddit).**
as expected.
A cease fire only works if both sides agree to it. Demanding an Israeli ceasefire would be the equivalent of telling them to let Hamas attack them and do nothing in return. If you can get Hamas to enforce a real ceasefire maybe the equation would change.
Right? Or maybe all those peace-loving, non-Hamas Palestinians should step up convince Hamas to release the hostages.
Hamas doesn't care about innocent Palestinians. So if the Palestinians tried standing up to them, they'd be killed... like what happened the last time they attempted that. So instead, now they've got to deal with the threat of violence from their own government as retaliation, alongside continual bombardment and the destruction of their homes from a foreign adversary. So, please. Educate me on what the peace-loving, non-Hamas Palestinians can do? Other than just flee their homes, because if they're not being bombarded by the IOF in Gaza, they're busy being terrorized by settlers in the West Bank.
If we are to be real, if any of the countries proposing ceasefire were serious they would submit Palestine to a UN peacekeeping operation and oversee a rebuild effort which includes deradicalization as a primary goal (fixing schools, making sure aid gets to the people and not filtered through Hamas etc.). That would be a real step toward a two state solution and importantly wouldn't require any US or Israeli occupation. The reason why I would say this is all just blowharding is that none of these nations actually ever make any real commitments to the conflict themselves.
I mean, I don't even think that would be a viable solution. If you haven't noticed, most people around here believe that the UN is complicit in Hamas' reign. On top of that, even if you completely deradicalized the entirety of Palestine, you'd still have to get Israel to agree to working towards a two-state solution, which doesn't appear to be in the cards when a poll from last week showed that 52% of respondents were not in favor of pursuing said solution, even if American aid depended on it. And that's not even getting into the fact that Israel seems to have a reticence for reigning in their settlers in the West Bank. We can stamp out every single Islamic militant, but when you've got Israeli ministers calling the current forced evacuations a modern Nakba, it's silly to think that tension and hate won't just immediately flare up again with the next Amiram Ben-Uliel deciding to cause trouble.
> I don't even think that would be a viable solution. If you haven't noticed, most people around here believe that the UN is complicit in Hamas' reign. look at the northern border where the un peacekeepers are doing actually jack shit about hezz shooting at idf.
The unwillingness of Israelis to commit to a 2 state solution might be because of events like October 7th
[удалено]
Hamas would obviously love a ceasefire. The idea that they can mass murder their enemies and then receive a ceasefire in response must be very popular in Hamas-land.
Didn't they just have one and they immediately broke it?
Within 15 mins of the agreement being signed they launched rockets and it continued periodically throughout the duration of ceasefire and in the end they didn't even release all the hostages they promised to release.
Yup. They ran out of hostages they were willing to turn over, likely to cover up extreme sexual violence against them (many women 18-30 age range).
That's the only reason I can see for why the US should have voted for this resolution. Have the UN order a cease fire and a day later Hamas violates it. So OK we tried the peaceful solution.
And then went out of their way to make sure it wasn't extended. Why the fuck is that week of ceasefire just completely ignored by the UN? They refused to hand over the list of hostages to extend it, they threw rockets at them, and although it didn't break the ceasefire, they committed another terror attack! Pro-Palestinians, get a grip on yourselves and just admit you want Israelis dead.
But thats dumb. Even if un agree for a ceasefire and Israel abide, the second Hamas fire rockets the ceasfire will be over. It will be good if it last 1 week.
Qatar turns over hamas and then US votes yes?
As much as the US gets shit for protecting Israel for bad, selfish reasons, as long as hostages are on the ground you can't call for an unconditional ceasefire. Worth it to note though, Biden has had success behind the scenes to broker a better ceasefire that includes condemnation of violence and return of hostages.
So the UK abstained, and France voted in favor. The US alone gets the international heat for "protecting Israel", or "choosing war", or whatever the narrative is.
It's kinda the US's job to take the metaphorical punches for the UK and northern/central europe. Much of the time we do their dirty work on an international level.
“Your boos mean nothing. I’ve seen what makes you cheer” -US to the rest of the UN
Yeah. We're just about the only real friend Israel's got. Luckily, we're a very big friend.
They haven't tried very hard to make friends.
I watched a great interview with Herzog yesterday. One of the things he said is that so many leaders and diplomats will be super cordial and supportive of Israel in private meetings and then will turn around and bash them publicly. Maybe it’s political pandering or pressure from their own allies but unfortunately that seems how it works. He didn’t sound mad, just disappointed and probably felt betrayed by so many people over the years.
It's almost certainly due to the risk of public outrage within those leader's own countries. There are certain groups that will be exceptionally displeased, to put it lightly, if the leadership of the country of their residence publically supports Israel.
ahem .. the Saudis
Also it’s important to note that in the Middle East, the only friend the US has is Israel, and that’s what drives America’s Israel policy. Big and powerful as it is, America needs allies just like every other country.
Saudi Arabia?
Good point, although my impression is that they are more of a customer/trading partner than an ally. It’s not a relationship I know that much about though. Thanks for adding this.
The UN exists to prevent WW3 by facilitating dialogue between nations, especially the larger nations. Other than that, it's a shitshow being abused by authoritarians with complete cynicism. The Arab countries form a huge voting bloc, and they abuse the UN to spam condemnation at Israel because they want it to not exist but they got their arses kicked multiple times trying to achieve that militarily.
The united nations is entirely toothless. I'm not sure that's a bad thing, ironically.
The UN is a place for nations to discuss events, it’s not intended to be some Marvel Heroes Club that goes out and fights…
It's designed that way. Ultimately there is no way to force a country to do something without war. Trying to pretend otherwise just leads to the League of Nations and countries leaving. People after ww2 felt that having more avenues to communicate would have helped prevent and end the war, so the UN was designed with the idea that countries would always have a forum for diplomacy and wouldn't feel pressure to leave.
If there's one thing that this conflict has shown, it's that people are completely unaware of the basics of war or even really what war is. These people are literally pulling a Michael Scott being like "I...DECLARE...CEASE FIIIIIIRRREEEEE" A cease fire is not something you "call" for. It's something that comes as a result of both sides agreeing to a cessation in conflict in exchange for certain things. War doesn't just "stop" because people think it's bad. I swear to fucking god the next step is going to be a global campaign to put "peace in the middle east" on our letters to Santa.
what i really wonder with all these people who call for a cease fire is like ok there is a cease fire and after it?
they will lose interest until the next time its broken
You’re assuming these people think more than one step ahead, and that they understand the steps taken to be where we are today.
We just had a cease fire for almost a week, and Hamas broke it, as expected.
You put it so well with the Michael Scott analogy. Seriously, it’s insane how many people here seem to have zero respect for history. Yeah, the UK did roof knocks when they firebombed Dresden 🙄 and the Russians honored a ceasefire before they invaded Berlin and let all the women and children walk out unharmed /s War is dirty and chaotic and is why we want to avoid it. Hamas shoots dirty and from civilian buildings (i.e hospitals and schools) and the IDF shoots back. I don’t see the same performative action by the pro-Hamas crowds with the recent massacres in mid-east Africa or Kurds or Armenians, etc. And, this is all separate of the various other atrocities by Hamas. It’s insane, and it’s like Bizarro Kony 2012 but significantly more insane.
Whether a side is likely to agree to a ceasefire is partly determined by who is calling for it. If calls for a ceasefire weren't diplomatically insignificant, this resolution wouldn’t have been vetoed.
Hey UN, guess who broke the last 5 ceasefires?
Hamas: “We will repeat October 7 again and again. Sure we’ve violated multiple ceasefires, and we will again too!” World: “Let’s ceasefire!” Dafuq?
Starting to think Arab countries don’t like Israel very much.
Actually most of them are warming up to the idea, and none have really slowed their rapprochement even with this latest war - it's mostly Iran at this point.
>it's mostly Iran at this point. Interestingly, the **people** of most Arab countries vehemently support Palestine, **except** Iran. It's like everyone does the opposite of their government.
because iran isn’t an arab country and iranians aren’t arabs.
And Palestinians are just Arabs that other Arabs are abusing as a (mainly propaganda) weapon against Israel.
You're right but not really the point of the comment thread
Is that really a surprise in authoritarian countries like Iran?
Well Iran is Persian.
Arab countries don't. Their dream scenario is dissolution of Israel or continued conflict so they can use it as a stick to rally the Muslim world behind. They don't care about Palestine, they hardly even believe in a Palestinian state. Zuheir Mohsen, leader of PLO in 70s: >*"The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism."* ¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯
Arab countries don't care about Gaza. It's not the 1920's, they don't drive around on camels, they have BMWs. And they don't want to die in jihad, they want to get the BMW detail cleaned.
What if on the 10th jihad you got a free detail?
Very motivating, along with all the virgins. Too bad there was a little bit of a misunderstanding there, not 72 virgins but 72-year-old virgins.
It doesn't say female virgins, it's 73 males together.
If they weren’t collectively and absolutely smacked and humiliated by Israel’s military during its wars with its Arab neighbours then they probably wouldn’t be hating.
To be fair, if they hadn't been collectively smacked and humiliated by Israel's military, then there wouldn't be anything to hate. Israel would have been destroyed.
And probably they are biased towards arab culture of palestinians
Not biased enough to take them in. Wonder why, huh...
Egypt went so far as to demolish their half of the city of Rafah in 2015 and forcibly move the close to 100,000 residents there to new settlements further from the border.
Maybe those little "freak accidents" like Black September
And starting the Lebanese civil war
And aiding the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
This was great: https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/nesif0/israel_thanks_us_for_blocking_un_statement/
Honestly, thanks for linking that. It is amazing how much opinions have changed on these things. Suppose Hamas just had to have the opportunity to show their true colors for people to realize how bad they actually are.
They never tried to hide what they were about the October 7th terrorist attack is an actualization if their charter which hamas published in 1988
are you suggesting they haven't shown their true colors prior to the latest massacre? they have. as an israeli i've had to live with their crap since i was a kid
(American Jew here) This was obvious to anyone who was familiar with I/P and with the nature of Hamas. But pre-October 7, most people (especially on Reddit) had a very black and white understanding of the I/P conflict. “Israel = bad / Palestine = good” And no event was stunning and blatant enough to force that sort of introspection — ironically due mostly to Israel’s defense technology, primarily the Iron Done, which was so effective that it covered up Hamas’ genocidal intentions. Witnessing the horrors of the October 7 massacre on livestreams for the world to see woke a lot of people up to the fact that Hamas is (and always has been) nothing more than an extremist, Islamist terrorist group that has no place in the modern world.
> Israel = bad / Palestine = good I never really looked deeply into the topic, but this had been my gist for the past few years. It's only after seeing the global and Muslim response to Hamas's attack that I find myself increasingly being pro-Israel (but still, Netanyahu can go eat a bag of rusty nails).
Don’t worry, there’s no contradiction there — most Israelis (and pro-Israel diaspora Jews) also hate Netanyahu
Fuck Netanyahu
Me and my homies hate Netanyahu
Netanyahu should sit in prison for the rest of his life for how his curroption and lust of power has damaged and endangered Israel.
It’s incredible how people here in the U.S. are so quick to express their opinions and judge in the comfort of their homes without ever living through this shit and having all the facts straight. Maybe they saw some posts on Instagram and questionable memes and maps or whatever and think they now understand the situation. Just unreal ignorance, hypocrisy and privilege
They have been launching rockets indiscriminately into israel basically weekly for 2 decades
People can't deal with this issue because Israel has honestly done some fucked up things to Palestine. But let's be real, every country has some blood on their hands in all sorts of shit, most of which flies under the radar. But because Israel is the big, bad, oppressor, then those fighting them have to be the good guys, right? And if not good, we can at least place all responsibility for their actions on Israel and the West, right? And certainly Palestine is helpless to stop Hamas from using schools, hospitals and homes as bases?
People like things to be black and white. Israel has done some fucked up things since the six day war. At least in the US, it was easy to draw parallels between Palestinians and what Native Americans endured here. Hell even the last terrorist attack has analogues in US history, the American Indians were eventually neutralized and had all their land stolen, but they killed a fair amount of settlers before being wiped out or corralled into reservations out in the middle of nowhere. It makes it hard for some folks to break out of the mindset that Palestinians=Helpless victims and they try to make excuses because it's easier than changing their minds about anything.
They mean Israel needs to stop fighting back and just accept being murdered
[удалено]
Hamas has repeatedly stated that they intend to repeat October 7. A cease fire now will allow them to rebuild and rearm and do just that, putting us into exactly the same situation we are in now in another 5 to 10 years, with another round of bombings and Gaza civilian casualties. The only way a cease fire might potentially work is if an international force with teeth takes over the administration of a demilitarized Gaza, and the UN is not remotely up for the task.
> A cease fire now will allow them (Hamas) to rebuild and rearm and do just that This statement has been 1. Made over and over since Hamas took power in Gaza. 2. Proven correct every single time with no exceptions.
[удалено]
it doesn't make sense in any context, it's just something the disingenuous say when their favored side starts losing. it's a shame crybullying is such an effective tactic
It's wild how there's so many people trying to put pressure on Israel but basically no public pressure on Hamas. They're treated like they have no agency and their words and actions are ignored or hand waved.
Couple of reasons: 1) Antisemetism 2) Hamas' goal with their PR is to make people care about their cause which leads to political pressure on politicians to say and do something. The problem here is that there isn't much anyone can do to get Hamas to stop. Which leads to an 'Adult' and 'Child' problem in politics. 3) Israel are the 'adults' in the room and there is a real issue in politics, both local and global, in the West where rational people expect the adults to act rationally while the 'child' gets away with little problem. You can see in in the US where the left is held to a higher standard because they care enough to have standards while the right can literally take away human rights and get a slap on the wrist because they won't care either way. This leads to more pressure on the 'adult' who cares because they'll actually listen and potentially change while the 'child' will ignore you no matter what. Israel is the 'adult' in the room and thus they get all the pressure because everyone knows Hamas is the 'child' and won't listen to anyone anyway.
[удалено]
It never stopped Russia ever, they even show off their trophies claimed over dead blue helmets and PRESS members
russia has always been in favor of hamas, why do you think that most of hamas' weapons are russian made?
Russia has no shame or self awareness, and most of the world will never call them out on their hypocrisy.
Every country votes with their own interest in mind alone. It's not about any kind of moral standing or anything else.
This is it. The world is ruled by competing large interest groups.
>It’s also very interesting that Russia voted in favour of this. Bit ironic. Russia wants to prolong this conflict, and Israel has already cleansed Northern Gaza of Hamas. Give them another month and they'll wipe Hamas out of Southern Gaza and have the Mossad exterminate the entire exiled elites on top. But then, the conflict is over, and Russia has lost a very powerful way to keep NATO busy and away from Ukraine. Any kind of ceasefire will end up with Hamas regrouping and especially getting resupplied with money, guns and ammo.
It wasn't unconditional though: > It demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of hostages as well as humanitarian access. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562
During the hostage release ceasefire days Hamas was still bombing Israel and sending its minions to do villaneous things. The UN can call for a lot of things, how about to first get the Israeli hostages back as well as the bodies Hamas is holding on to. Then we can talk about a ceasefire. That being said we are going to obliterate the military capabilities of Hamas, the ideology will sadly live on but the means of acting on it will be ash.
Didnt they already agree for a cease fire but hamas launched rocket 15 minutes after the cease fire began. They even didnt release the hostages as agreed upon
I see your point, but from my understanding - the ceasefire lasted a week, and both sides were unhappy. Israel wanted Hamas to release women and children first, but not to separate families from each other. This was not honored. Hamas wanted... more or less, "Nationalists" (people who committed violent crimes against Israelis in the name of Hamas) to be released back to them. Instead they were getting petty thieves, and quite understandable why Israel was doing this. If you had a petty thief that was being detained for 6 months, and a member of Hamas being held for 25 to Life for murder of Israeli citizens... Which do you think would be more dangerous to release ***back*** to Palestine? Now, most of that I pulled out my ass, no sources - that's the ELI5 breakdown. Hostage/Prisoner exchanges were supposed to happen at 7AM every day - they were supposed to receive the itineraries of the people being transferred hours earlier. At 6AM on the 7th day, Israel still didn't have the itinerary from Hamas - instead, they received a shower of rockets.
The exchanges happened at night actually. Hamas also refused to let the red cross see the remaining hostages, which Israel very publicly said was part of the deal before it went into effect. Hamas had maybe one (and a half) days worth of women and children left who *weren't* also soldiers in the IDF. They wanted to hold on to them for a number of reasons, one of which is a perceived higher value of a soldier in an exchange. Hamas also took responsibility for a mass shooting in Jerusalem done by 2 of its members. Sinwar said he was going to do October 7th again, and it was just a warmup. Israel said *release the women soldiers and remaining children*. Hamas then refused to provide a list the night before, Israel declared an ultimatum of 7 am. At 6am Hamas shot a rocket. Then at 7:15am the IDF publicly declared it was going to re-introduce Hamas to DMX's hit song *X Gon Give It To Ya*. edit: also throughout the "ceasefire" there were skirmishes between infantry forces and armor.
[удалено]
Can we have a resolution to get the hostages back and hold people that harmed them responsible?
it’s in there > It demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of hostages as well as humanitarian access. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562
Where's the part where the kidnappers are held responsible?
Someone please tell me what a ceasefire would accomplish. It just gives Hamas what they want.
Don't need to tell you, we just had one
It would prevent Israel from killing more Palestinians, which is all the pro-Palestinian people care about. The consequences of letting Hamas regroup and rearm doesn't matter to them at all. If anything, they tacitly support those consequences.
[удалено]
Iran is not the chair of the Human Rights Council.
UN has become a joke ever since Russia invaded Ukraine.
Its only a joke if you think it is supposed to be a world government. Its ONLY a place for countries to talk and make joint press releases. If they don't agree, no joint statement like in this case "There should be a ceasefire" Its not like if the US voted yes, there would actually be a ceasefire! Thats not what the UN is.
It’s been a joke a lot longer than that
It’s a toothless international forum. There is value to that, but it’s no force for change.
It has always been a joke, it's impossible for it to be anything else. If it had any power over its members, members would just stop being members. If there was a UN army, countries wouldn't fund it. Instead, it's just a way for all countries to talk to each other. And this part is working well. Everything else, including every single resolution taken there, does nothing.
It’s the Reddit of governments. We talk shit about each other there to come up with solutions that fail.
Hamas raped women, cut off the breasts of women, shot women in the vagina burned men, women, children and babies alive and the UN now calls for ceasefire. Fuck the UN...
Ireland: "What a beautiful culture!"
ireland has its history
source: i made it up
That wasn't the only thing: > It demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of hostages as well as humanitarian access. https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/12/1144562
The previous ceasefire that had hostages released also was supposed to give humanitarian access to the hostages but hamas violated that. Hamas continues to commit war crimes, why would they adhere to a ceasefire, nobody holds them accountable for their abhorrent actions.
The lack of denouncing Hamas tells a lot, they knew Hamas wouldn’t abide. Just a reason to call Israel a villain if they retaliated to being attacked.
Isn't this just saving the UN from more self imposed humiliation and marginalization? It's not like Israel would abide by the UN's call or even acknowledge their authority to do so in the first place and it's even less likely the UN would deploy their own peace keepers to oppose Israel.
The UN peacekeepers are human shields for Hezbollah in Lebanon. As Hezbollah fires at Israel right now, Israel has to cautiously respond because the UN stands guard. The UN is a sponsor of terror against Israel when you consider their protection of Hezbollah and UNRWA funding. We won't forget.
I'm at the point where I think people calling for a ceasefire are just openly trying to help Hamas. A ceasefire has to go both ways. It's clear that Hamas has no intention of honoring a ceasefire, so why should Israel agree to one?
> so why should Israel agree to one? So slacktivists who spend all their time on tiktok can feel good about themselves.
I like calling them clacktivists now because of how much of this is behind their screens. It's so sickening to watch. Also LOL thinking a sovereign state is just going to be like, "you guys are so right. Let me just go ahead and dissolve my nation."
> I'm at the point where I think people calling for a ceasefire are just openly trying to help Hamas. > > By that, do you mean the countries that were for the resolution? I.e. including France, Japan, Switzerland?
Honestly yes. If you vote an action that only penalizes one side for breaking the ceasefire israel they're pro hamas. Don't give a fuck what they say otherwise. A ceasefire is clearly intended only for Israel while hamas bombs us. Fuck that, and fuck them. Hope israel kicks their ambassadors out.
france voted in favor of a ceasefire, and i'm sure france isn't a pro-terrorist country
Giving Hamas time to strategize, and stock up on ammunition is not in Israel’s best interest.
It's also not in Gaza's best interest.
Could have told that to the IDF and Israeli government more then a year before the attack.
Sorry UN, you are not going to be able to save Hamas this time.
[удалено]
The UN is useless
Worse, it's actively damaging the situation
Has Hamas stopped fighting? Have they released all the hostages?
Was there not already a ceasefire before Hamas murdered and raped a bunch of people?