U.S. Isolated at UNSC - U.S. Vetoes UNSCR on JerusalemWatch this thread
The draft resolution implicitly criticised Trump's recent controversial declaration as Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, without specifically naming the United States as the target of the proposal.
[we express] deep regret at recent decisions concerning the status of Jerusalem... any decisions which purport to have altered the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council.
Nikki Haley harshly criticised the US's traditional allies (such as the UK and France):
What we witnessed here in the UNSC today is an insult and will not be forgotten.
There will now be a similar vote in the UNGA, which the U.S. cannot veto. This which would lack legally-binding status, but would reaffirm the international community's stance of the Jerusalem.
This follows a UNSCR that passed in December demanding that Israel halted their illegal settlement program, which Israel has not complied with.
Since 1970, the U.S. has used its veto more than China, France, Russia/USSR and the UK combined. In addition, more than half of all U.S. vetoes have been to protect Israel from accountability (see the graphic below).
I didn't mention the media; that is not what my thread is about, though I doubt you bothered to read the OP anyway.
There's countless videos of Obama, Clinton and Bush all saying the same thing. Why is it different when the current presidents says it? Explain with logic please.
[He once referred to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, but that was in 2008 at AIPAC, and he quickly clarified/backtracked from that.]
Trump unilaterally reversed decades-long consistent US policy on Jerusalem, that is not up for dispute.
This thread is about the US's isolation from its traditional allies and at the international stage at large.
You'll also find that your infographic is wrong given that just shy of half of all vetoes were USSR/Russian Federation, the figures it uses appears to exclude the USSR vetos (there have been a total of 76 vetos by France, UK, China, and RF but the most recent Russian veto was only a month ago).
Oh, I see, no, it cuts off the first quarter of a century of the UNSC, probably because that covers the period of prolific vetoing from the USSR.
I would suggest you try reading a few of those 42 vetoed items though and look at where they come from, lots of them are more or less the same document coming from states who do not even believe Israel should exist demanding Israel stops acting to defend their citizens from terrorist attacks.
Is the US not within its right to vote against a motion that is telling it what to do?
Oh, I see
Is this threatening language aimed at allies (including the UK) appropriate? Given the U.K. (along with every other UNSC member) supported the proposal, should we be worried that the U.S. has now placed us on their naughty list?
No real surprises here. Also, given Obama did let through Res 2334 right at the end of his term, this is a bit of trying to close the barn door after the horse has bolted.
Looks like threats and blackmail isn't a winning solution to getting people on your side, who knew?
Too busy promoting conspiracies that Trump is controlled by Putin when his actions show they're under Israels control but we already knew that didn't we?
Under Trump we've had
Continued sanctions against Russia
Supplying more weapons to Ukraine
Cracking down on Russian media
Of course this is happening because the DEEP state, which is full of Hillary butthurt supporters and also neo-cons have been pushing for a conflict with Russia for ages including under Obama.
They promote this conspiracy to back Trump into a corner, forcing him to only be hostile because if he wasn't it would be proof that he's Putin's puppet LOL
Unbelievable how thick people are.