• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel Isolated as UN Security Council Demands Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza

Geoist said:
We agree on that. Do we agree there needs to be a process of enforcement within the UN? I know there are some conservatives who are not comfortable with that idea.
Click to expand...
Agree or not, the 5 permanent members of the UNSC will not allow this.
 
The Hama's terrorist need to be exterminated.

They're no different than the ISIS POS's who attacked innocents in Russia.

Or the Muslim garbage who flew jets into the towers.

I'm for killing every last one of them.
 
Absentglare said:
Well, yes and no. It’s long been seen as impotent as far as forcing hard consequences, but it is a useful barometer for a soft power that Israel is losing. Which I think was the real purpose of Hamas’ disgusting attack, to bait Israel into hurting its own international reputation.
Click to expand...

The most dangerous regimes in the world are the ones with cunning. Putin is a perfect example of this, and the puppet masters in Iran is another one. Those with cunning create “heads I win / tails I lose” situations.

October 7th was a disgusting and abysmal master stroke by an evil regime. Given the severe death toll and the abject depravity against a solely civilian target and objective, not to mention the hostages (don’t get me started about Hamas’s continued issue giving accurate count of a few hundred / dozens of hostages over months, but able to get death totals to the last child 5 seconds after an attack), there was no reasonable nor rationale way for Israel not to retaliate massively nor for them to be able to stomach Hamas being in control and entrenched on their door step. To refrain from dealing with those two things would not only be a travesty no other country would stomach, but one I don’t believe the Israeli people would stand for. AND YET, given the propaganda talents of those directly or ideologically aligned with Hamas and the general view point of much of the world as it relates to Israel, and given the US public’s inability to truly stand by any sort of large scale or long term conflict in a strong and positive way, and given the realities of how a war against Hamas would need to be enacted, it was almost a guarantee that if Israel did what the first option required that they would damage their relationship with the world and potentially the US. Especially with a democrat president in an election year that appears to be a close race.

Either Israel has a devastating and disgusting attack on it but doesn’t respond in the rational and reasonable fashion that any normal country would react, thus angering its population, emboldening future attacks, and leaving a barbaric enemy on its borders.

OR

Israel retaliates and does the actions needed to end Hamas as a legitimate power in Gaza and craters their already tenuous standing on the world stage and drive a severe wedge into the alliance with their strongest and most important ally

Heads Hamas wins. Tails Israel loses.

Horrible, evil, genius cunning and strategy.
 
Zyphlin said:
The most dangerous regimes in the world are the ones with cunning. Putin is a perfect example of this, and the puppet masters in Iran is another one. Those with cunning create “heads I win / tails I lose” situations.

October 7th was a disgusting and abysmal master stroke by an evil regime. Given the severe death toll and the abject depravity against a solely civilian target and objective, not to mention the hostages (don’t get me started about Hamas’s continued issue giving accurate count of a few hundred / dozens of hostages over months, but able to get death totals to the last child 5 seconds after an attack), there was no reasonable nor rationale way for Israel not to retaliate massively nor for them to be able to stomach Hamas being in control and entrenched on their door step. To refrain from dealing with those two things would not only be a travesty no other country would stomach, but one I don’t believe the Israeli people would stand for. AND YET, given the propaganda talents of those directly or ideologically aligned with Hamas and the general view point of much of the world as it relates to Israel, and given the US public’s inability to truly stand by any sort of large scale or long term conflict in a strong and positive way, and given the realities of how a war against Hamas would need to be enacted, it was almost a guarantee that if Israel did what the first option required that they would damage their relationship with the world and potentially the US. Especially with a democrat president in an election year that appears to be a close race.

Either Israel has a devastating and disgusting attack on it but doesn’t respond in the rational and reasonable fashion that any normal country would react, thus angering its population, emboldening future attacks, and leaving a barbaric enemy on its borders.

OR

Israel retaliates and does the actions needed to end Hamas as a legitimate power in Gaza and craters their already tenuous standing on the world stage and drive a severe wedge into the alliance with their strongest and most important ally

Heads Hamas wins. Tails Israel loses.

Horrible, evil, genius cunning and strategy.
Click to expand...
I guess genius if you're Iran and you're the one who planned it and sat peacefully by as it happens and continues to roll out.
Not so genius if you're Hamas, that has had most of its members killed by now and an even a greater percentage killed/captured/seriously-wounded, and all of its leadership are pretty much dead people either currently or in the near future.

I agree with your point specifically regarding the Israeli public not ever accepting the thought of allowing Hamas to continue existing after October 7.
If Netanyahu's regime would have opted out sooner or later from this mission to eradicate Hamas, he would simply be replaced immediately by someone else, no matter the method by which he is replaced.
No one is going to tolerate this genocidal organization on his doorstep any longer, their destruction is the only acceptable point of start for any other scenario.
 
gboisjo said:
The Hama's terrorist need to be exterminated.

They're no different than the ISIS POS's who attacked innocents in Russia.

Or the Muslim garbage who flew jets into the towers.

I'm for killing every last one of them.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%!
 
sanman said:
Ceasefire resolution has been passed at the UN - a sign of a political threshold has been crossed in Washington

www.theguardian.com

Israel isolated as UN security council demands immediate ceasefire in Gaza

Israeli PM cancels White House visit by two ministers and says US ‘abandoned its policy in the UN’ after abstaining on vote
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com


Click to expand...
The Israeli government is are comparing the US position to that of the Nazi enablers who stood by and allowed the Nazis to murder millions without lifting a hand to save the Jews.

(And, if it isn't already doing so, it will be by next week.)

Obviously the only thing that the Israeli government can do is to implement whatever measures are required to ensure a Final Solution to the Palestinian Problem as rapidly as possible so that the Israeli government can, once again, cozy up to the US government in order to resume its spying on the United States of America unhampered by ill feelings toward Israel.
 
Mungo Jerry said:
What happens if everyone ignores a demand from the UN to cease fire?
Click to expand...
Why the UN could authorize the world's governments to provide assistance in repelling an invasion and the restoration of peace and governmental stability.

You know, like it did in Korea.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Why the UN could authorize the world's governments to provide assistance in repelling an invasion and the restoration of peace and governmental stability.
Click to expand...
Could. Won't.
 
Apocalypse said:
Not so genius if you're Hamas, that has had most of its members killed by now and an even a greater percentage killed/captured/seriously-wounded, and all of its leadership are pretty much dead people either currently or in the near future.
Click to expand...

Ever hear the Golden Rule rephrased as “treat others as THEY would like to be treated”? It’s based off the notion that too often we judge another’s actions or desires based on our own precepts of reality and logic as it relates to “rationality” and what is a sensible goal.

This is a problem that presents itself often in our domestic partisan politics as we seek to understand each other and voter motivation…but it is also instrumental to foreign policy because it’s too easy to fall into the trap that everyone thinks like us.

I say it may still be cunning on Hamas’s part because for them, a debilitating blow to Israel’s relationship with America and turning the tide of the international community completely against them may actually be viewed as an acceptable outcome in exchange for the ending of their organization as a practical sense. Think if it as organizational martyrdom. If they strike the lethal blow between the Israel and American alliance, then their work as an psuedo political suicide bomber would likely be looked at as a resounding success.
 
Absentglare said:
There is an element of ridiculousness in demanding a ceasefire of Israel while Hamas still holds innocent Israeli civilians hostage.

The hostages must be released. Then, Israel would be in a position to permit a ceasefire and an influx of sorely needed humanitarian aid.

Hamas should not be in charge of Gaza. But neither should Ali Khamenei be in charge of Iran, nor Vladimir Putin be in charge of Russia. The people of Gaza deserve a measure of self-determination, and Israel, too, deserves a better leader than Netanyahu.
Click to expand...
I really do have to admire the shining clarity of your thoughts. What happens in the situation where "A" announces that it has released all of the hostages that it had held and "B" says that it doesn't believe "A" because there are still _[fill in the blank]_ people unaccounted for and that means that "A" is still holding them hostage"? Exactly how do you propose to prove hat "A" has, in fact, released all of the hostages that it had held (short of an intensive search of every square inch of all of the territory that "A" controlled - including destructive testing of all building to ensure that there are no secret hiding places and digging up every square foot of ground to a depth of at least six feet to ensure that there are no hidden tunnels and such)?
 
Apocalypse said:
I guess genius if you're Iran and you're the one who planned it and sat peacefully by as it happens and continues to roll out.
Not so genius if you're Hamas, that has had most of its members killed by now and an even a greater percentage killed/captured/seriously-wounded, and all of its leadership are pretty much dead people either currently or in the near future.

I agree with your point specifically regarding the Israeli public not ever accepting the thought of allowing Hamas to continue existing after October 7.
If Netanyahu's regime would have opted out sooner or later from this mission to eradicate Hamas, he would simply be replaced immediately by someone else, no matter the method by which he is replaced.
No one is going to tolerate this genocidal organization on his doorstep any longer, their destruction is the only acceptable point of start for any other scenario.
Click to expand...
I suppose that once Hamas are all dead, the only bad guys left in Palestine will be Israeli. That does simplify things.
 
JMB1911A1 said:
This demand for a cease fire will be ignored by Bibi. And the UN will be exposed as the impotent organization that we all know it is.
Click to expand...
The UN is as impotent as the US government requires it to be. If the situation were otherwise, the US government would not be a member of the UN.
 
GOP Hippo said:
Nothing.
Over a year ago the UN approved a resolution demanding Russia leave the Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Resolutions of the UN General Assembly are not binding. The Resolution you are referring to was a resolution of the UN General Assembly.

Resolutions of the UN Security Council are binding. Russia has a veto on the UN Security Council. Are you honestly asking people to believe that Russia either voted for, or abstained, in the vote on a UN Security Council resolution that called upon Russia to leave Ukraine?
GOP Hippo said:
The UN is a very expensive wet noodle.
Click to expand...
The US government (effectively) dictated (read as "Do it the way we say to do it or we won't join.") the structure and power of the UN at both the General Assembly and the Security Council levels. The US government (effectively) dictated (read as "Do it the way we say to do it or we won't join.") the financing structure of the UN.

What is NOT going to happen is the passage of any UN Security Council resolution authorizing any and all countries to come to the aid of the Palestinians in repelling an invasion and in restoring civil order.

Why is that NOT going to happen? Because the US government will veto it. If the US government does not - directly - veto it, then it will abstain and have its proxy veto cast by either France or the UK (since any disruption of their trade with the US would wreak great disruption on their economies and the US government would be very sure to make it clear to them that any vote either in favor or in abstention on the resolution would have "serious consequences" which might well "alter the tradition trading patterns" between them and the US.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Resolutions of the UN Security Council are binding.
Click to expand...
"Binding" in that all members if the UN agree to follow the terms of UNSC resolutions.
If they refuse, the UN will tell them how mad it is.
TU Curmudgeon said:
What is NOT going to happen is the passage of any UN Security Council resolution authorizing any and all countries to come to the aid of the Palestinians in repelling an invasion and in restoring civil order.
Why is that NOT going to happen? Because the US government will veto it.
Click to expand...
Truth.

 
AliHajiSheik said:
1. Demands an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire, and also demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address their medical and other humanitarian needs, and further demands that the parties comply with their obligations under international law in relation to all persons they detain;

Link
Click to expand...
Not good enough for some. For them the resolution should have read

"Demands an immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, an immediate and unconditional delivery to the courts of Israel of any and all persons even remotely associated with the taking of all hostages, demands an immediate and unconditional cease fire on the part of "Hamas" and, upon the verified completion of all three of the foregoing politely suggests to the government of Israel, that possibly it isn't necessary to shoot ALL the prisoners it takes within one hour of taking them."​

in order to prove that the UN isn't a bunch of antisemitic Nazi Communists dedicated to the total eradication of the Jewish race in violation of the laws of God.
 
Zyphlin said:
Ever hear the Golden Rule rephrased as “treat others as THEY would like to be treated”? It’s based off the notion that too often we judge another’s actions or desires based on our own precepts of reality and logic as it relates to “rationality” and what is a sensible goal.

This is a problem that presents itself often in our domestic partisan politics as we seek to understand each other and voter motivation…but it is also instrumental to foreign policy because it’s too easy to fall into the trap that everyone thinks like us.

I say it may still be cunning on Hamas’s part because for them, a debilitating blow to Israel’s relationship with America and turning the tide of the international community completely against them may actually be viewed as an acceptable outcome in exchange for the ending of their organization as a practical sense. Think if it as organizational martyrdom. If they strike the lethal blow between the Israel and American alliance, then their work as an psuedo political suicide bomber would likely be looked at as a resounding success.
Click to expand...
An interesting viewpoint and, potentially, one well suited to a culture "steeped in martyrdom" as some branches of fundamental Islam are.
 
Geoist said:
We agree on that. Do we agree there needs to be a process of enforcement within the UN? I know there are some conservatives who are not comfortable with that idea.
Click to expand...
No I don't want to see the UN have a process to enforce resolutions. Not because I'm uncomfortable with force.

Who is in charge at the UN?
Who was in charge when the UN failed in Rwanda?
Who was in charge at UN when they stole funds selling Iranian oil?

The US military is as good as any in the world. If US forces see combat it should be for US interests.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom