Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
RoofGardener

When is a UN Resolution NOT a UN Resolution ?

36 posts in this topic

I read a curious article on the BBC News website today.

It appears that the UN Security Council have agreed a 'statement' saying that Israel must cease fighting immediately. Well.... sort of. The full story is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-28520227.

But here's the thing; it's a statement... an order even ... but it doesn't appear to be an actual Resolution .

Has anybody ever heard of the SC doing this before ?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a curious article on the BBC News website today.

It appears that the UN Security Council have agreed a 'statement' saying that Israel must cease fighting immediately. Well.... sort of. The full story is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-28520227.

But here's the thing; it's a statement... an order even ... but it doesn't appear to be an actual Resolution .

Has anybody ever heard of the SC doing this before ?

it's more of a press statement i think, the resolution will come later?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

most UN resolutions aren't worth the toilet paper they're written on....

.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yes, it is normal in SC deliberations to advise belligerents of a SC Order. Israel of course will ignore any such order, as they have done so in the past. Israel is a rogue state, free to pursue it's Nuclear Ambitions without fear of reprisal, free to use disproportionate force in the face of minor incursions,and free to use banned Military Ordnance and weaponry without reservation. All because this nation of 8 million people in the ME has USA approval and massive military monetary support.

Just imagine for a moment if the USA did not guarantee this military aid - Israel would then be forced to negotiate with it's neighbours, to negotiate a peace - after all, Saudi Arabia, Oman , Kuwait, UAE would all be happy to negotiate a long - lasting accord with Israel, to share technology and resources IF Israel abandoned it's policy of Apartheid. I know it is all "pie in the sky" because as long as the USA backs this tiny nation then nothing will change. But, if this were to happen then the tensions in the ME would be restricted to the ME and no more western soldiers would need to lose their life for some regime that was inimicable to their own way of life.

Edited by keithisco
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But here's the thing; it's a statement... an order even ... but it doesn't appear to be an actual Resolution .

What difference does it make? When did Israel abide by an actual Resolution?

It's a statement alright. More words, again. Just rhetoric. Talk is cheap. Action is expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is normal in SC deliberations to advise belligerents of a SC Order. Israel of course will ignore any such order, as they have done so in the past. Israel is a rogue state, free to pursue it's Nuclear Ambitions without fear of reprisal, free to use disproportionate force in the face of minor incursions,and free to use banned Military Ordnance and weaponry without reservation. All because this nation of 8 million people in the ME has USA approval and massive military monetary support.

Just imagine for a moment if the USA did not guarantee this military aid - Israel would then be forced to negotiate with it's neighbours, to negotiate a peace - after all, Saudi Arabia, Oman , Kuwait, UAE would all be happy to negotiate a long - lasting accord with Israel, to share technology and resources IF Israel abandoned it's policy of Apartheid. I know it is all "pie in the sky" because as long as the USA backs this tiny nation then nothing will change. But, if this were to happen then the tensions in the ME would be restricted to the ME and no more western soldiers would need to lose their life for some regime that was inimicable to their own way of life.

Artfully done. You just described washing our hands and walking away from what would become a genocide (If it were possible) of Jews by Arabs. But the flaw in your plan are those nukes you mentioned. The world may hate Israel but ti can't just turn it's back on them any longer. That is a good thing imo. Ever look at Israel on a map? I mean REALLY look? You almost can't see it because it's so small and yet people all over the world seem to think that if the Israelis will just give up a little more land, everything will be okay. It isn't really about the land. It's about Jews living in lands considered to be Islamic. And the world is going to one day burn because of the hatred and because they aren't willing to stand for what us right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Artfully done. You just described washing our hands and walking away from what would become a genocide (If it were possible) of Jews by Arabs. But the flaw in your plan are those nukes you mentioned. The world may hate Israel but ti can't just turn it's back on them any longer. That is a good thing imo. Ever look at Israel on a map? I mean REALLY look? You almost can't see it because it's so small and yet people all over the world seem to think that if the Israelis will just give up a little more land, everything will be okay. It isn't really about the land. It's about Jews living in lands considered to be Islamic. And the world is going to one day burn because of the hatred and because they aren't willing to stand for what us right.

I just felt I needed to highlight some of the hyperbole and vitriolic in your "Attack" on reason...

The ONLY reason that Israel is not subject to greater condemnation from the UN is simply because the USA veto's ANY and ALL sanctions through the SC when it comes to the count. Israel, is a serious rogue nation in the world, believing that its own unique brand of terrorism, murder, incarceration, and apartheid is morally just. That is plain wrong.

The western world has "sucked up" to Israel for far too long because it is the Western World that created it. If you make a mistake you should own up to it and say "it wasn't meant to be like that". Far from that which you state, the Western World has not turned it's back on Israel, it has SUPPORTED it's despotic leaders since 1948 - and that has now got to change.

Israel has got to be held to account by the world for all of the atrocities that it has committed on the back of some misbegotten belief that because Jews were also involved in the holocaust, that it should be given free reign to bring the same or worse bloodshed on any nation it so desires.

Israel does not conform to International regulations when it comes to nuclear enrichment and weapons building, YET any other nation can become the target of censure and sanctions should they pursue this particular path. Israel should not be considered a "special" case given their propensity to mindless violence, and instability.

IF Israel stopped stealing lands from the rightful owners, the clear intent to annexe land that it has no right to, then a lot of tension would be released - it is as if Israel WANTS and indeed welcomes such international outrage because it knows that the International arena is powerless to do anything due to the support of the USA in everything it does, be it covert or overt support. Even the USA and other Western nations realise that it has created a monster by ensuring that Saudi Arabia could, should it so wish, overrun Israel in just a few days. It has the western supplied means to negate any planned Israeli nuclear strike before the weapons can even be deployed. Does SA do so? No, because it is not hell bent on starting a war - I wish the same could be said of Israel

Please check on your history - none of the land can possibly be Islamic, because Islam is a 7th century construct.

From your post.

And the world is going to one day burn because of the hatred

... not even close, if Israel even thinks of deploying its nuclear arsenal then the response from the west will be swift and merciless because theatre nuclear weapons have no means of being selective to military targets. The western world owes Israel nothing - rather Israel owes the Western world everything, including its very existence... and it needs to remember that every once in a while

Edited by keithisco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE-

When is a UN Resolution NOT a UN

Resolution ?

.

to be honest.., i was kinda waiting for the punchline....

.

o_O

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a curious article on the BBC News website today.

It appears that the UN Security Council have agreed a 'statement' saying that Israel must cease fighting immediately. Well.... sort of. The full story is here: http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-28520227.

But here's the thing; it's a statement... an order even ... but it doesn't appear to be an actual Resolution .

Has anybody ever heard of the SC doing this before ?

http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/statements/

The basic difference, I believe, is that a statement says "Hey. Stop doing that".

A resolution adds the part that says "or else we'll do x".

Presumably a statement that says that something needs to stop is easier to agree on than the way to make it stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just felt I needed to highlight some of the hyperbole and vitriolic in your "Attack" on reason...

The ONLY reason that Israel is not subject to greater condemnation from the UN is simply because the USA veto's ANY and ALL sanctions through the SC when it comes to the count. Israel, is a serious rogue nation in the world, believing that its own unique brand of terrorism, murder, incarceration, and apartheid is morally just. That is plain wrong.

The western world has "sucked up" to Israel for far too long because it is the Western World that created it. If you make a mistake you should own up to it and say "it wasn't meant to be like that". Far from that which you state, the Western World has not turned it's back on Israel, it has SUPPORTED it's despotic leaders since 1948 - and that has now got to change.

Israel has got to be held to account by the world for all of the atrocities that it has committed on the back of some misbegotten belief that because Jews were also involved in the holocaust, that it should be given free reign to bring the same or worse bloodshed on any nation it so desires.

Israel does not conform to International regulations when it comes to nuclear enrichment and weapons building, YET any other nation can become the target of censure and sanctions should they pursue this particular path. Israel should not be considered a "special" case given their propensity to mindless violence, and instability.

IF Israel stopped stealing lands from the rightful owners, the clear intent to annexe land that it has no right to, then a lot of tension would be released - it is as if Israel WANTS and indeed welcomes such international outrage because it knows that the International arena is powerless to do anything due to the support of the USA in everything it does, be it covert or overt support. Even the USA and other Western nations realise that it has created a monster by ensuring that Saudi Arabia could, should it so wish, overrun Israel in just a few days. It has the western supplied means to negate any planned Israeli nuclear strike before the weapons can even be deployed. Does SA do so? No, because it is not hell bent on starting a war - I wish the same could be said of Israel

Please check on your history - none of the land can possibly be Islamic, because Islam is a 7th century construct.

From your post.

... not even close, if Israel even thinks of deploying its nuclear arsenal then the response from the west will be swift and merciless because theatre nuclear weapons have no means of being selective to military targets. The western world owes Israel nothing - rather Israel owes the Western world everything, including its very existence... and it needs to remember that every once in a while

I'm speaking in a broader sense when I explain the end result. Israel - unlike Iran or possibly Pakistan someday - would only ever use a nuke as a last resort. Truly the name of that strategy is fitting the "Samson" option. It's actually just a fancy way of saying M.A.D. but Israel is governed by people who love LIFE and they know that to survive they must get along to the extent they can with those who virulently hate them. But when that hate is no longer contained and the world finally comes for them, whether in the form of a coalition attack or a great power assault, the Jews have decided - rightly - that they will NOT burn alone. All of the suppositions that you and others make about the future of Israel fly in direct opposition to the facts that have been repeatedly displayed concerning their treatment by their enemies. Dress it up in any language you like but the bottom line is that the "solution" always, always leaves Israel smaller and weaker and subject to the whims of a murderous enemy. My prognostication about the world being badly burned doesn't even need prophecy to be seen - just common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUOTE-

When is a UN Resolution NOT a UN

Resolution ?

.

to be honest.., i was kinda waiting for the punchline....

.

o_O

Punchline: When it concerns Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artfully done. You just described washing our hands and walking away from what would become a genocide (If it were possible) of Jews by Arabs. But the flaw in your plan are those nukes you mentioned. The world may hate Israel but ti can't just turn it's back on them any longer. That is a good thing imo. Ever look at Israel on a map? I mean REALLY look? You almost can't see it because it's so small and yet people all over the world seem to think that if the Israelis will just give up a little more land, everything will be okay. It isn't really about the land. It's about Jews living in lands considered to be Islamic. And the world is going to one day burn because of the hatred and because they aren't willing to stand for what us right.

Do you think I stand up for what I believe is right because I love to go against my own nation?

not a thrill, believe me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

http://www.un.org/en...nts/statements/

The basic difference, I believe, is that a statement says "Hey. Stop doing that".

A resolution adds the part that says "or else we'll do x".

Presumably a statement that says that something needs to stop is easier to agree on than the way to make it stop.

It's an interesting thought Tiggs. However, I was under the vague impression that all SC Resolutions incorporated instructions on how to accomplish it.. and they where also usually balanced, ensuring that the Resolution itself didn't become a tactical weapon ?

Oh well.. no doubt al will become clear.

Edited by RoofGardener

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IF Israel stopped stealing lands from the rightful owners

And the Palestinians are the rightful owners?

How many of them actually had papers/deeds to the land they were kicked off of from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Israel of course will ignore any such order,

And hence the title of the OP. The UN has no teeth and as long as it has no teeth, there is no reason for anyone to abide by it. But then, once it gets teeth, there would be the chance to abuse that power and the SC becomes oppressive themselves which returns us to the preposition that we should just let the two peoples work it out between them. The bottom line is that both parties will never be happy, someone is going to end up with the short end of the stick so you have to make a choice. You can hope that Israel can end this quickly keeping the misery and death down to a minimum or you can demonize Israel in such a way as to prolong the misery.

as they have done so in the past.

What about Hamas and Hezbollah? They ignore such orders all the time. On a side note, where is Hezbollah? You’d think that if Israel didn’t demolish their capability for war in 2006 as many would like to claim, that they would be coordinating an attack. But I would think that if Hezbollah would jump in here after Ramadan is ending, then Israel would take off the gloves.

Israel is a rogue state,

Really? Do they export terrorism like Iran does? Are they a pariah like Iran is? Has Israel ever threaten to wipe out the regime in Tehran off the face of the map, just because?

free to pursue it's Nuclear Ambitions without fear of reprisal,

And if they weren’t, how long do you think they would exist? She is surrounded by nations whose religious duties include the destruction of Israel.

free to use disproportionate force in the face of minor incursions,

And this matters why? The Palestinians need to learn that if you pee on Israel, Israel will wipe out your city. It has to be disproportionate because eventually, the rockets will stop. The only way to stop the aggression against you is to make it so undesirable by your enemies to attack. That is a simple axiom. This is the same thing that happened in Jordan in 1970 but it was a month long purge.

and free to use banned Military Ordnance and weaponry without reservation.

And rockets being fired indiscriminately into urban areas are fine? Many times banned ordnance is only banned if directly used against human targets. There are situations in which use against non-human targets is needed. Human casualties are but collateral damage. But what about the situations where Hamas tries to launch a rocket and it goes awry or goes off before leaving the pad which is in the midst of school children and then used as a photo op to blame Israel? Isn’t that banned? To use civilians as shields?

All because this nation of 8 million people in the ME has USA approval and massive military monetary support.

This is the most anti Israeli Administration ever. And the military support isn’t really all that massive. It’s about $5 billion a year (USAID). Israel’s GDP is about $250 billion which puts it at the 42nd richest nation in the world. Israel also produces much of their own armaments so they really don’t need that support. Israel is the beneficiary of that $5 billion because of a treaty which benefits the other two parties more. King Abdullah may need every drop of it if ISIS moves south.

Just imagine for a moment if the USA did not guarantee this military aid - Israel would then be forced to negotiate with it's neighbours, to negotiate a peace

No, it would not be forced. It has negotiated peace with its neighbors Jordan and Egypt. The other neighbors have rejected negotiations because of religious dogma and the false belief that they can defeat Israel.

- after all, Saudi Arabia, Oman , Kuwait, UAE would all be happy to negotiate a long - lasting accord with Israel, to share technology and resources IF Israel abandoned it's policy of Apartheid.

Israel has no policy of apartheid. Gaza and the WB are not part of Israel, therefore, it is not apartheid. This is just an indication of racism against Israel that you parrot. Israel and these Arab nations are hardly interested in sharing technology for peace, if they aren’t already involved with each other anyway. But you shouldn’t be blaming Israel with apartheid policies in the same breath with the Arab Kingdoms of Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, and UAE as Arab kingdoms are known for apartheid and subjugating policies.

I know it is all "pie in the sky" because as long as the USA backs this tiny nation then nothing will change.

You really want to enable Islamic terrorism? A defeated Israel will show weakness and will only encourage the extremists to push it further.

But, if this were to happen then the tensions in the ME would be restricted to the ME and no more western soldiers would need to lose their life for some regime that was inimicable to their own way of life.

And you’d be wrong as Islam would and is spreading all around the world. And just like ISIS, other more power Islamic states will rise up to threaten the West. Islam needs to reform and learn how to cooperate in a world of multiple religions as an equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting thought Tiggs. However, I was under the vague impression that all SC Resolutions incorporated instructions on how to accomplish it.. and they where also usually balanced, ensuring that the Resolution itself didn't become a tactical weapon ?

Oh well.. no doubt al will become clear.

It doesn't even matter, because as soon as you add "or else we'll do x", the US will veto it by default. So yeah, it's more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.... I'm not sure that's historically accurate, Yamato ? I think you'll find that the US has withheld its veto, on a large number of occasions.

Anyway, that's not really why I started this thread. I was more interested in the procedural aspects of the current statement. The story states that the Security Council issued a statement, but.... it never said anything about voting on it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm speaking in a broader sense when I explain the end result. Israel - unlike Iran or possibly Pakistan someday - would only ever use a nuke as a last resort. Truly the name of that strategy is fitting the "Samson" option. It's actually just a fancy way of saying M.A.D. but Israel is governed by people who love LIFE and they know that to survive they must get along to the extent they can with those who virulently hate them. But when that hate is no longer contained and the world finally comes for them, whether in the form of a coalition attack or a great power assault, the Jews have decided - rightly - that they will NOT burn alone. All of the suppositions that you and others make about the future of Israel fly in direct opposition to the facts that have been repeatedly displayed concerning their treatment by their enemies. Dress it up in any language you like but the bottom line is that the "solution" always, always leaves Israel smaller and weaker and subject to the whims of a murderous enemy. My prognostication about the world being badly burned doesn't even need prophecy to be seen - just common sense.

Pakistan has got them nukes but i haven't seen them fire so far... I don't trust any country who got them nukes, no one can assure me that there is no chance of those nukes to end up in bad hands and there is same chance for such thing to happen in both Pakistan and Israel.

'What would happen' can't be an excuse to call one country a terrorist country and you can't use something that i COULD do to justify your self. As for people who love life, well, over 1000 civilians dead in Gaza speaks different, or is it enough to care for your own life to be described as an life keeper?

Double standards are worst problem of society everywhere and UN has lost faith that people have in them, they just take their big wages while its hard to see results on the field. Not only because of Palestine, remember Rwanda, Srebrenica... The list goes on, there is something called ' VETO ' and mostly that is more important then the lives of hundreds or thousands of people. So about the UN, they can make all sorts of decisions and they can try to urge on countries to do something but UN doesn't have the power to implement anything anywhere. I lost faith in them long ago they are just a tool in the hands of powerful.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting thought Tiggs. However, I was under the vague impression that all SC Resolutions incorporated instructions on how to accomplish it.. and they where also usually balanced, ensuring that the Resolution itself didn't become a tactical weapon ?

Oh well.. no doubt al will become clear.

I don't think that can be the case.

UN resolutions 244 and 338 telling Israel to get out of the occupied lands of 1967.

Did they have threatening language in the "or else" part of it? Not that I ever saw.

Maybe when Saddam was in Kuwait.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Palestinians are the rightful owners?

How many of them actually had papers/deeds to the land they were kicked off of from?

Many of the Pals had title to their homes, farms/land.

But in 1967 when Israel "defended themselves" in West bank, the second building they destroyed was the Registry of Deeds. That was done so that any Palestinian holding title to a home/land cannot match it up with the deed, and the Israeli courts say, "See ya! Too bad, you lose"

You may be surprised to know that many Palestinian homes go back to the time of Christ and they actually lived with the Sephardi Jews. There was no problem, *until* the blowhard Euro Ashkenazi Jews came into the Levant. Then.....

Problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm.... I'm not sure that's historically accurate, Yamato ? I think you'll find that the US has withheld its veto, on a large number of occasions.

Anyway, that's not really why I started this thread. I was more interested in the procedural aspects of the current statement. The story states that the Security Council issued a statement, but.... it never said anything about voting on it ?

You're not sure, you didn't have to say that. On a large number of what occasions? I'm not talking about non-binding resolutions that don't come from the Security Council, I'm talking about what you're talking about.

I'm not really interested in the UN making a statement, and far less interested in something as boring as the procedure behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pakistan has got them nukes but i haven't seen them fire so far... I don't trust any country who got them nukes, no one can assure me that there is no chance of those nukes to end up in bad hands and there is same chance for such thing to happen in both Pakistan and Israel.

'What would happen' can't be an excuse to call one country a terrorist country and you can't use something that i COULD do to justify your self. As for people who love life, well, over 1000 civilians dead in Gaza speaks different, or is it enough to care for your own life to be described as an life keeper?

Double standards are worst problem of society everywhere and UN has lost faith that people have in them, they just take their big wages while its hard to see results on the field. Not only because of Palestine, remember Rwanda, Srebrenica... The list goes on, there is something called ' VETO ' and mostly that is more important then the lives of hundreds or thousands of people. So about the UN, they can make all sorts of decisions and they can try to urge on countries to do something but UN doesn't have the power to implement anything anywhere. I lost faith in them long ago they are just a tool in the hands of powerful.

Ahh but if I say "the sun will rise tomorrow" then it has a little more reliability than if I say Hamas will stick to THIS truce..no, really they will...

Those who observe this situation carefully realize that both have done wrong but primarily it is the Palestinian who has chosen to literally die before accepting a process begun by the UN many years ago. Israel EXISTS. Israel is never going to be pushed into the sea but the Palestinians appear willing to fight and die for a hundred years or more to make that happen. While I admire their tenacity I think they would not be so dogged if their leaders did not push the issue so fervently. Anyway, bottom line is that neither the Palestinians nor the international community are going to shame Israelis into suicide. So if the bloodletting must continue for a century then it must. It wouldn't be the first or last time such intractable hatred has been sown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh but if I say "the sun will rise tomorrow" then it has a little more reliability than if I say Hamas will stick to THIS truce..no, really they will...

Those who observe this situation carefully realize that both have done wrong but primarily it is the Palestinian who has chosen to literally die before accepting a process begun by the UN many years ago. Israel EXISTS. Israel is never going to be pushed into the sea but the Palestinians appear willing to fight and die for a hundred years or more to make that happen. While I admire their tenacity I think they would not be so dogged if their leaders did not push the issue so fervently. Anyway, bottom line is that neither the Palestinians nor the international community are going to shame Israelis into suicide. So if the bloodletting must continue for a century then it must. It wouldn't be the first or last time such intractable hatred has been sown.

About that hatred... Did you see videos from latest gatherings in Israel... The crowd cheers, calls out this lines '' there is no need for education in Gaza, there are no children there anymore ''.

I was so sad and mad at same time after seeing few videos and no one can tell me that Israelis aren't the same kind of haters that they accuse Palestinians to be so please, what does show even more hate is the fact that IDF use airplanes against people who don't have any modern weapon. 2nd day of Eid - 60 air strikes on Gaza. Love, peace, civilization. Check out video please.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About that hatred... Did you see videos from latest gatherings in Israel... The crowd cheers, calls out this lines '' there is no need for education in Gaza, there are no children there anymore ''.

I was so sad and mad at same time after seeing few videos and no one can tell me that Israelis aren't the same kind of haters that they accuse Palestinians to be so please, what does show even more hate is the fact that IDF use airplanes against people who don't have any modern weapon. 2nd day of Eid - 60 air strikes on Gaza. Love, peace, civilization. Check out video please.

Israel is fricking insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not sure, you didn't have to say that. On a large number of what occasions? I'm not talking about non-binding resolutions that don't come from the Security Council, I'm talking about what you're talking about.

I'm not really interested in the UN making a statement, and far less interested in something as boring as the procedure behind it.

Then kindly take your off-topic ramblings into another thread, and leave THIS one (just one) for those of us who ARE interested in what the UN is doing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.