Article: Russia and China warn US that an Israeli attack on Iran means world war...

[CGM]

While I agree with that, the entity of Palestine was an arbitrary western creation as well. I know this seems random, but that's something I feel is also overlooked in the whole Israel - Palestine discussion.

That's true enough, but what is also seldom mentioned is that when the west (the UN actually) was trying to stickhandle this whole mess after the war, the Arab leaders took a hard line and didn't exactly play ball, and the UN called their bluff and acted unilaterally and the palestinian people got the short end of the stick.

The modern knot of this struggle is the structure of the UN: The security concil and the unlimited veto they can blindly use. i wrote an article that will get published about it in a few months, halas it's in french otherwise I would upload it for the interested ones, I just need to make a few touches up and it's done. If one couldn't use the veto more than X times on some regions or some cases, Israel wouldn't be on the winning end as they would face sanctions. Unfortunately, the consil can wage as many vetos as they want and then, countries of that consil can protect their own interests and we have the mess we face now, especially because it gives all the flux of arguments to fill the mulsim radical groups: "- you see, the international community aren't helping us and aren't willing to do so, the only solution we have is Allah and to show them what we're made of'". Change the veto situation and on the other end, you also choke down the muslim radicals as their revendications are obsolete if Palestine recover their lost boundaries and have a legitimate state.

Well, point taken, I wasn't so much referring to what is happening now is to what happened back then when Israel was formed. But yeah, the UN now sure has it's flaws and limitations. The veto system certainly hi-lites those flaws, but I'm nott convinced veto system is the problem in and of itself, but it is misused by those who have veto power as a way to further their politics. The real problem is a total lack of consensus on the politics.

Anyways, I'm interested in your article, give us a link when it gets published, even if it is in French I have friends that can deal with that.

[Nameless]

That's true enough, but what is also seldom mentioned is that when the west (the UN actually) was trying to stickhandle this whole mess after the war, the Arab leaders took a hard line and didn't exactly play ball, and the UN called their bluff and acted unilaterally and the palestinian people got the short end of the stick.

The modern knot of this struggle is the structure of the UN: The security concil and the unlimited veto they can blindly use. i wrote an article that will get published about it in a few months, halas it's in french otherwise I would upload it for the interested ones, I just need to make a few touches up and it's done. If one couldn't use the veto more than X times on some regions or some cases, Israel wouldn't be on the winning end as they would face sanctions. Unfortunately, the consil can wage as many vetos as they want and then, countries of that consil can protect their own interests and we have the mess we face now, especially because it gives all the flux of arguments to fill the mulsim radical groups: "- you see, the international community aren't helping us and aren't willing to do so, the only solution we have is Allah and to show them what we're made of'". Change the veto situation and on the other end, you also choke down the muslim radicals as their revendications are obsolete if Palestine recover their lost boundaries and have a legitimate state.

Well, point taken, I wasn't so much referring to what is happening now is to what happened back then when Israel was formed. But yeah, the UN now sure has it's flaws and limitations. The veto system certainly hi-lites those flaws, but I'm nott convinced veto system is the problem in and of itself, but it is misused by those who have veto power as a way to further their politics. The real problem is a total lack of consensus on the politics.

Anyways, I'm interested in your article, give us a link when it gets published, even if it is in French I have friends that can deal with that.

I have to send it tomorrow or in 2 days, I can send it to you in the meantime for a lecture if you want, it's more or less 15 full pages. Thus said, I really think after my researches that the veto system is a major problem, I explain why in a nutshell:

the 5 persons who are the only one to benefit it are the 5 kings winner of the second world war: France, China, Russia, UK, US, at the time, these countries were given that (by themselves, of course) as they were the "guardians" of the planet, the 5 most able nations. TOday things have chanced and many other countries are contributing even more to the UN than some of them (i.e Japan and Germany for example). On all the vetos waved, 90% have been used.. by Russia and the US. Basically, if you possess a veto, you can't be sentenced by anything at all by the UN, you're totally covered.
Not only that but any resolution voted by the general assembly depends about if you decide or not to use your veto, so basically, the article 97 that says that every nations are equal in the UN is pure bullshit as 5 countries can say no to whatever they want and nobody can't do nothing about it. To this day, more than 135 resolutions have been voted against israel because of their incredible and non-sense actions, war crimes and such... 135 times the international community said that it was too much and had to be sanctionned but the US did drown the whole thing, just making the problem bigger and bigger.
Everytime a resolution is voted or vetoed, not only the whole system is paralyzed but it costs hundred of thousand of dollars, sometimes millions thrown down the drain (hostel for everybody, paying security, deplacement, lawyers, translaters etc). If 75% of the world vote in favor of something, how can you justify that a random dude, because he won 70 years ago has the sole right to say no depending of his humor? especially when he's not "watching" as much as he's supposed to over the rest of the world? if you ask me, this is non-sense, the veto should be abolished or controlled, like you can't use it more than once a year or not more than once or twice when it concerns denounciations of a specific country.

[CGM]

OK bud, then hold off for now on sending the whole package. I'll take a little time to digest these few paragraphs and let you know if I have appetite for more.

[Gandalf]

The modern knot of this struggle is the structure of the UN: The security concil and the unlimited veto they can blindly use. i wrote an article that will get published about it in a few months, halas it's in french otherwise I would upload it for the interested ones, I just need to make a few touches up and it's done. If one couldn't use the veto more than X times on some regions or some cases, Israel wouldn't be on the winning end as they would face sanctions. Unfortunately, the consil can wage as many vetos as they want and then, countries of that consil can protect their own interests and we have the mess we face now, especially because it gives all the flux of arguments to fill the mulsim radical groups: "- you see, the international community aren't helping us and aren't willing to do so, the only solution we have is Allah and to show them what we're made of'". Change the veto situation and on the other end, you also choke down the muslim radicals as their revendications are obsolete if Palestine recover their lost boundaries and have a legitimate state.

Well, point taken, I wasn't so much referring to what is happening now is to what happened back then when Israel was formed. But yeah, the UN now sure has it's flaws and limitations. The veto system certainly hi-lites those flaws, but I'm nott convinced veto system is the problem in and of itself, but it is misused by those who have veto power as a way to further their politics. The real problem is a total lack of consensus on the politics.

Anyways, I'm interested in your article, give us a link when it gets published, even if it is in French I have friends that can deal with that.

I have to send it tomorrow or in 2 days, I can send it to you in the meantime for a lecture if you want, it's more or less 15 full pages. Thus said, I really think after my researches that the veto system is a major problem, I explain why in a nutshell:

the 5 persons who are the only one to benefit it are the 5 kings winner of the second world war: France, China, Russia, UK, US, at the time, these countries were given that (by themselves, of course) as they were the "guardians" of the planet, the 5 most able nations. TOday things have chanced and many other countries are contributing even more to the UN than some of them (i.e Japan and Germany for example). On all the vetos waved, 90% have been used.. by Russia and the US. Basically, if you possess a veto, you can't be sentenced by anything at all by the UN, you're totally covered.
Not only that but any resolution voted by the general assembly depends about if you decide or not to use your veto, so basically, the article 97 that says that every nations are equal in the UN is pure bullshit as 5 countries can say no to whatever they want and nobody can't do nothing about it. To this day, more than 135 resolutions have been voted against israel because of their incredible and non-sense actions, war crimes and such... 135 times the international community said that it was too much and had to be sanctionned but the US did drown the whole thing, just making the problem bigger and bigger.
Everytime a resolution is voted or vetoed, not only the whole system is paralyzed but it costs hundred of thousand of dollars, sometimes millions thrown down the drain (hostel for everybody, paying security, deplacement, lawyers, translaters etc). If 75% of the world vote in favor of something, how can you justify that a random dude, because he won 70 years ago has the sole right to say no depending of his humor? especially when he's not "watching" as much as he's supposed to over the rest of the world? if you ask me, this is non-sense, the veto should be abolished or controlled, like you can't use it more than once a year or not more than once or twice when it concerns denounciations of a specific country.

Really interesting post. I agree with pretty much all of what you are saying here. The UN clearly needs reforming with special attention being paid to the paralysing and wasteful veto.

Israel should have been undergoing international sanctions years ago. The amount of garbage they have been allowed to get away with over the years is shameful.