• Immersive_Matthew@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    1 year 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.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        In before the “Um AkShUaLlY iT’s A rEpUbLiC nOt A dEmOcRaCy” drones that know what neither a democracy or a Republic is.

    • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year 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
        9
        ·
        1 year 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
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year 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
          3
          ·
          1 year 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.

        • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That is the saying. Sailing to weather in a stiff breeze for any significant length of time is often unpleasant, unless one is racing. It’s hard on the boat, too. After a while, one learns to sail with the wind whenever possible rather than fight nature.

    • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where are you getting this 70% number from? Did they do a national vote on the topic? Or maybe it’s just a pulling number you read somewhere and now parrot without source.

      Hardly a nail in any coffin. This is exactly how representative democracy works. You vote for someone to represent you in the government. Those someone’s collaborate to the best of their ability to make policies and decisions. Don’t like their policies and decisions. Vote for someone else.

      • restingboredface@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        But why though? This is literally the only thing that the GOP and democrats agree on and it’s a totally dysfunctional level of allegiance to Israel above any other nation. It doesn’t make sense. Bibi is a total douche and they are clearly committing war crimes over there. Hamas sucks but should we really be standing shoulder to shoulder with Israel on this one?

      • Eldritch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nationally, currently yes. But not completely. Granted they are trying to smear and attack every Democrat that has. But I think Talib and others. Are relatively safe at their local level.

    • Arelin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not supporting Israel goes against every profit incentive that the oil, military, and other megacorporations have. EU may not like to say it as openly, but they want this to continue too.

      Human lives don’t matter in the face of capitalist profit after all.

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

      🙄

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

  • ZzyzxRoad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    1 year 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
      17
      ·
      1 year 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…

  • Poggervania@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year 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 👊

  • osarusan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year 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
      26
      ·
      1 year 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
        5
        ·
        1 year 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.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ll translate for those that doesn’t speak US foreign policy-ese.

      “We fully support our pet genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state in their genocidal ventures.”

    • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year 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
        4
        ·
        1 year 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
          8
          ·
          1 year 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
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year 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.

            • OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I dont disagree with the statement that there’s nothing redeeming about them. I agree they are a bad organization that is ALSO causing harms to the citizens of Palestine.

              All I’m asking you to agree to is that the people of Palestine would benefit from a cease fire, if only to reduce the total number of civilian deaths. They cause civilian death, and so does Israel, but as long as the conflict is hot and active, that death and suffering is at it’s zenith.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                All I’m asking you to agree to is that the people of Palestine would benefit from a cease fire, if only to reduce the total number of civilian deaths. They cause civilian death, and so does Israel, but as long as the conflict is hot and active, that death and suffering is at it’s zenith.

                A) this has nothing to do with Hamas

                B) my opinion will not influence this situation at all

            • masquenox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              There is nothing redeeming about Hamas.

              You mean… apart from the fact that they are at war with a genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state?

  • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I feel like there should be a limit on how many times a country can exercise their veto rights, at least.

    US has a long history of single-handedly bullying entire UN with their veto power.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      US gas a long history of single-handedly bullying entire UN with their veto power.

      Many of the US’s vetos would’ve been voted against by other countries and/or vetoed by France/UK if the US weren’t there. The US is a convient country to take the fall.

  • SheeEttin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    • problematicPanther@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not if it’s from the security council. Security council resolutions are legally binding, whereas GA resolutions are more like suggestions.

  • Ullallulloo@civilloquy.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year 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
      22
      ·
      1 year 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.

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

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

      • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re not exactly up to date on current events. There was a weeklong ceasefire that ended a few days ago, hamas violated it by launching rockets at israeli cities and refusing to release more hostages.

      • giggling_engine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, Israel isn’t going into some random village to rape torture and mutilate women, children, and babies. Israel also treats prisoners with dignity and don’t just forgets where they put them, starve them, and neglect to give them needed medicine. Israel also doesn’t just fire randomly into heavily populated areas for the sole purpose of killing as many civilians as possible. So there’s that.

        The devil is in the details that you choose to ignore.

          • giggling_engine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            This “open air prison” is the making of Hamas.

            When a group of people elect an organization whose main agenda is to anihilate its neighboring country, you don’t just stand there and do nothing. You prevent them from gaining weapons and ammunition. The only way to do this is to control their borders.

            And behold, they did exactly what they said they would on 7/10. The only surprise is that they succeeded.

            Now some facts - Israeli Arabs, you know, the peaceful ones, have full right and full access to anything they want. That includes being in the Israeli army, with access to weapons and ammo. Big weapons, lots of ammo. They’re also elected to Israeli government, just a year ago a Muslim party was in government. Why are they trusted to all this while the Palestinians aren’t? Simple, they’re not trying to murder people.

            Something tells me you’ve never been in any real danger that you think problems like this get solved by doing nothing, and playing nice.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Israel isn’t going into some random village to rape torture and mutilate women, children, and babies.

          Oh, but they are.

          • giggling_engine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “some minority people did crime” (and get punished for it). Settlers do not represent Israel, nor do they represent the army. Apples to oranges.

            • dustyData@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Did you fail to read the part where sometimes the IDF joins in with the settlers? They almost never get punished for it, or it’s just a slap on the wrist because the Palestinians have no rights in Israel’s court system. Settlers are exactly what Israel is, a country founded on the worst white-supremacist imperialist, theocratic, ethno-colonialism.

              Are you a genocide apologist just for fun or are you just evil?

    • NoLifeGaming@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not an excuse to kill innocent people. Especially children. Would it be okay to carpet bomb and kill innocents in tel aviv if hamas was there?

      • giggling_engine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The irony is staggering. That’s exactly what Hamas is trying to do, and would succeed if it weren’t for the iron dome system.

        • NoLifeGaming@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hamas wouldn’t exist if the Palestinians weren’t treated like animals and had their land taken, their women raped, and children blown to smithereens.