Go to first unread
Back
to top
U.S. Isolated at UNSC - U.S. Vetoes UNSCR on Jerusalem
Watch this thread
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
As a further display of the U.S.'s isolation on the international stage, the U.S. vetoed a UNSC draft resolution that reaffirmed the international consensus on the status of Jerusalem.
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.
The other 14 members of the UNSC (including UK, Russia, China, France, Italy, Japan, Sweden and Ukraine) all voted in favour of the resolution.
Nikki Haley harshly criticised the US's traditional allies (such as the UK and France):
Nikki Haley is known to have received hundreds of thousands of dollars in political donations from the far-right pro-Israel hawk Sheldon Adelson.
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).
![Image]()
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.
(Original post by Draft Resolution)
[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status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council.
[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status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council.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):
(Original post by Nikki Haley)
What we witnessed here in the UNSC today is an insult and will not be forgotten.
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).
2
reply
SkyFire007
Badges:
10
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report
#2
He simply stated something that past presidents have all said. Media going overhype yet again.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
(Original post by SkyFire007)
He simply stated something that past presidents have all said. Media going overhype yet again.
He simply stated something that past presidents have all said. Media going overhype yet again.
I didn't mention the media; that is not what my thread is about, though I doubt you bothered to read the OP anyway.
0
reply
SkyFire007
Badges:
10
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report
#4
So, straight off the bat you assume I'm a "supporter". The tribalism... it hurts.
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.
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.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
(Original post by SkyFire007)
He simply stated something that past presidents have all said. Media going overhype yet again.
He simply stated something that past presidents have all said. Media going overhype yet again.
[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.
0
reply
SkyFire007
Badges:
10
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report
#6
Why would I post a video of something that doesn't exist? The videos of the net, show he states it's the capital of Jerusalem. Just like your (probable) favourite dynasty Clinton and Bush 
https://youtu.be/mm42_08Uv5g
https://youtu.be/mm42_08Uv5g
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
(Original post by SkyFire007)
he states it's the capital of Jerusalem.
he states it's the capital of Jerusalem.
Just like your (probable) favourite dynasty Clinton and Bush
I think we are done here.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
An overview of the 14-1 vote on the UNSCR condemning Trump's unilateral recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel:
For:
- U.K.
- France
- Russia
- China
- Japan
- Italy
- Egypt
- Uruguay
- Bolivia
- Sweden
- Ukraine
- Ethiopia
- Kazakhstan
- Senegal
Against:
- U.S.
For:
- U.K.
- France
- Russia
- China
- Japan
- Italy
- Egypt
- Uruguay
- Bolivia
- Sweden
- Ukraine
- Ethiopia
- Kazakhstan
- Senegal
Against:
- U.S.
0
reply
Cho-clit addict
Badges:
1
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report
#9
"The wealthy Jews control the world..in their hands lies the fate of governments and nations..When the wealthy jews play, the nations and the rulers dance" - Theodor Herzl
0
reply
Jammy Duel
Badges:
21
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report
#10
Is the US not within its right to vote against a motion that is telling it what to do?
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.
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.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Is the US not within its right to vote against a motion that is telling it what to do?
Is the US not within its right to vote against a motion that is telling it what to do?
You'll also find that your infographic is wrong ...
Oh, I see
Oh, I see
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.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Prior to this vote Nikki Haley warned US allies, including the UK, that:
Source (her Twitter).
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?
... we don't expect those we've helped to target us. On Thurs there'll be a vote criticizing our choice. The US will be taking names.
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?
0
reply
Jammy Duel
Badges:
21
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report
#13
(Original post by Palmyra)
You appear to be confused. Which of the 14 UNSC members that voted in favour of this draft proposal "do not even believe Israel should exist"?
You appear to be confused. Which of the 14 UNSC members that voted in favour of this draft proposal "do not even believe Israel should exist"?
0
reply
FriendlyPenguin
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
anarchism101
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report
#15
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.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Napp
Badges:
22
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report
#17
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Is the US not within its right to vote against a motion that is telling it what to do?
.
Is the US not within its right to vote against a motion that is telling it what to do?
.
0
reply
username2950448
Badges:
20
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
(Original post by anarchism101)
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.
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?
0
reply
Ganjaweed Rebel
Badges:
17
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#19
Tibenasu
Badges:
2
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#20
Report
#20
Ever notice how Alexander Ham is always silent in these threads?
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?
Lets see..
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.
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?
Lets see..
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.
1
reply
X
Quick Reply
