• 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!

UN Security Council calls for Gaza cease-fire

D

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
This evening, the UN Security Council voted 14-0 with the U.S. abstaining on Resolution 1860, which called for an "immediate" ceasefire.

The U.N. Security Council approved a resolution Thursday night calling for an immediate and durable cease-fire between Hamas militants and Israeli forces in Gaza. The U.S. abstained from the 14-0 vote.

Israel and Hamas were not parties to the vote and it will now be up to them to stop the fighting. But the text of the resolution was hammered out by the United States, Israel's chief ally, and by Arab nations that have ties to Hamas and the Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied territories...

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States "fully supports" the resolution but abstained because it "thought it important to see the outcomes of the Egyptian mediation" with Israel and Hamas, aimed at achieving a cease-fire.
Click to expand...

washingtonpost.com
 
Although the resolution contains some constructive elements e.g., the call for a "durable" ceasefire, I believe it is seriously lacking in concrete substance.

• It fails to condemn the Hamas terrorist organization. That omission will contribute to Hamas continuing to claim legitimacy among Palestinians and it will reinforce a sense of "moral equivalency" that can only bolster Hamas in the long-run.

• While it calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from the Gaza Strip when a ceasefire is in place--something that Israel would do--it contains no enforcement mechanisms for ensuring Hamas complies with its terms. There is no armed international force for the Gaza Strip and Philadelphi Corridor. The situation in Lebanon in which Hezbollah has already more than regained the weapons it had lost in 2006 illustrates the dangers of an absence of robust enforcement machinery.

• While the resolution calls for renewed efforts aimed at achieving Israel-Palestinian peace, it fails to address the barrier Hamas poses. It does not call for the disarming and dismantling of Hamas and its infrastructure. It does not call for the Gaza Strip to be returned to the Palestinian Authority despite Hamas' seizure of the Gaza Strip in violation of the Palestinian constitution. It contains no enforcement machinery for bringing about such changes.

All in all, I believe the resolution is badly flawed. It does not remedy the situation for which Israel is acting in self-defense. Hence, in my opinion, Israel should continue its operations until its military goals are achieved.
 
Last edited:
donsutherland1 said:
Although the resolution contains some constructive elements e.g., the call for a "durable" ceasefire, I believe it is seriously lacking in concrete substance.

• It fails to condemn the Hamas terrorist organization. That omission will contribute to Hamas continuing to claim legitimacy among Palestinians and it will reinforce a sense of "moral equivalency" that can only bolster Hamas in the long-run.

• While it calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from the Gaza Strip when a ceasefire is in place--something that Israel would do--it contains no enforcement mechanisms for ensuring Hamas complies with its terms. There is no armed international force for the Gaza Strip and Philadelphi Corridor. The situation in Lebanon in which Hezbollah has already more than regained the weapons it had lost in 2006 illustrates the dangers of an absence of robust enforcement machinery.

• While the resolution calls for renewed efforts aimed at achieving Israel-Palestinian peace, it fails to address the barrier Hamas poses. It does not call for the disarming and dismantling of Hamas and its infrastructure. It does not call for the Gaza Strip to be returned to the Palestinian Authority despite Hamas' seizure of the Gaza Strip in violation of the Palestinian constitution. It contains no enforcement machinery for bringing about such changes.

All in all, I believe the resolution is badly flawed. It does not remedy the situation for which Israel is acting in self-defense. Hence, in my opinion, Israel should continue its operations until its military goals are achieved.
Click to expand...

Here is the problem. The citizens of Gaza VOTED for Hamas. Israel wanted their rival Fatah to win, and will do anything in its power to deal a death blow to Hamas. They did this by sealing Gaza and turning it into a "prison zone", and did not allow food or medicine into the area. On the other side of the coin, some of that so-called food and medicine was really weapons and parts for rockets.

The situation over there is extremely complicated, and there is plenty of fault to go around on both sides. Israel has a right to defend itself, but with so many women and children being killed, one has to think if Israel could have done better. Again, on the other hand, if Israel left Gaza alone, and allowed food and medicine into Gaza, would Israel be targeted a lot more than they are being targeted now?

Like I said, this is extremely complicated. Both Arabs and Jews should accept part of the blame, both Arabs and Jews have a legitimate beef against each other, and only the Arabs and Jews have the ability to forge a lasting peace with each other. US? UN? Some kind of miracle? No. It is sqarely in the hands of Arabs and Jews. But do they want peace, even after all this bloodshed that has taken mothers, fathers, and children from families on both sides? If they don't, it is only to the detriment of both Arabs and Jews. Hatred is a very strong thing, that can last from generation to generation. I don't see the end to this mess any time in the immediate future.

So sad.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom