• 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!

U.S. Abstains as U.N. Security Council Votes to Condemn Israeli Settlements

Last edited:
eohrnberger said:
On this particular issue it seems rather counter intuitive to support expanding the Israeli settlements as well support two state solution (the only thing there that seems to make sense).

The more the Israeli settlements expand, the more pissed off the Palestinians get, which is counter to a peaceful relationship and region.

Weren't the lands that the Israeli settlements are expanding into, once Palestinians lands?
Click to expand...

The Israeli's took em fair and square the Palestinians want them back then they should get an army together and get them back.
 
Captain America said:
Good.

I'm sick of being Israel's lapdog. It's like having a kid brother walking around the playground picking fights knowing his big brother won't let anybody punch him in the nose.

And, in regard to Palestine's overgrown bottle rockets, what else can they do? Throwing rocks don't work. (They just need bigger rockets.) Does anyone really want to compare the Palestinian body count against the Israeli's? Seriously. :roll:

Whatever. Not my circus. Not my monkeys. I wish they would just duke it out once and for all and last man standing turn out the lights. I'm sick of that Israeli/Palestinian problem. They deserve each other.
Click to expand...

I recall exactly the same statements being made by you more than 7 years ago when I first joined, it's certainly nice to see you stick by your repulsive, sickening and disgusting positions.
 
Sadly, the U.N. has a long history of being against the Israelis.
 
JANFU said:
The OP is about the US abstaining on Israeli settlements in the WB.
Has it happened before.
Click to expand...

The title of the thread is: U.S. Abstains as U.N. Security Council Votes to Condemn Israeli Settlements.

It seems to me the thread is about what the UN voted to do, not just what the US decided not to do.

I guess you're trying to make it about something else.
 
Fiddytree said:
Sadly, the U.N. has a long history of being against the Israelis.
Click to expand...

As admitted by the UN head himself for the first time not long ago.

NEW YORK – In his last address to the UN Security Council on Friday, outgoing Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon recognized that Israel is subject to strong bias in the international body, something that Israeli ambassadors to the UN, including Danny Danon today, have raised their voices about for years.

“Decades of political maneuverings have created a disproportionate volume of resolutions, reports and conferences criticizing Israel,” Ban said. “In many cases, rather than helping the Palestinian cause, this reality has hampered the ability of the UN to fulfill its role effectively.”

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


“The secretary-general admitted the clear truth, the UN’s hypocrisy towards Israel has broken records over the past decade,” Danon said in reaction to the statement.

“During this time the UN passed 223 resolutions condemning Israel while only eight resolutions condemning the Syrian regime as it has massacred its citizens over the past six years. This is absurd.

With a new secretary-general set to take office next month, we look forward to the possibility of a new era of fairness at the UN.”
Click to expand...

Ban Ki-moon recognizes bias against Israel in last Security Council speech - Israel News - Jerusalem Post
 
eohrnberger said:
On this particular issue it seems rather counter intuitive to support expanding the Israeli settlements as well support two state solution (the only thing there that seems to make sense).

The more the Israeli settlements expand, the more pissed off the Palestinians get, which is counter to a peaceful relationship and region.

Weren't the lands that the Israeli settlements are expanding into, once Palestinians lands?
Click to expand...

You are stating the position of Reagan and every other President .
 
JANFU said:
Thoughts are?
Click to expand...

We are going to have to wait to see if Trump pays a price for violating the "one President at a time" rule. I kind think he will not because the elite in general and Obama in particlar have been so inept that the rule deserved to die now.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
We are going to have to wait to see if Trump pays a price for violating the "one President at a time" rule. I kind think he will not because the elite in general and Obama in particlar have been so inept that the rule deserved to die now.
Click to expand...

Breaking the time-honored tradition of having one POTUS at a time has nothing to do with the elite or Obama.

It has everything to do with having honor and respect for the traditions of your Nation, neither of which trump has.

trump goes against every POTUS who has come before him since WW2 to pander for votes as he will never stop campaigning for reelection.
 
NIMBY said:
Breaking the time-honored tradition of having one POTUS at a time has nothing to do with the elite or Obama.

It has everything to do with having honor and respect for the traditions of your Nation, neither of which trump has.

trump goes against every POTUS who has come before him since WW2 to pander for votes as he will never stop campaigning for reelection.
Click to expand...

He does it because Obama is incompetent, and prick, and because Trump is itching to get busy making America Great Again.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
He does it because Obama is incompetent, and prick, and because Trump is itching to get busy making America Great Again.
Click to expand...

Calling Obama incompetent and a prick is quite mature, Hawkeye10.

Did you notice Bush do this to Clinton with two Presidents at a time?

I won't ask about Reagan and Nixon because both of them interfered with foreign negotiations before their elections .
 
NIMBY said:
You are stating the position of Reagan and every other President .
Click to expand...

From my view and my present understanding, it's a reasonable position.

Note, already, finding situations where Trump and myself have differences.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The Israeli's took em fair and square the Palestinians want them back then they should get an army together and get them back.
Click to expand...

Doesn't speak to the continued expansion of settlements and acquiring additional land, or does it?
 
Way to go Obama.

Too little, too late...but at least it is something.
 
ocean515 said:
The title of the thread is: U.S. Abstains as U.N. Security Council Votes to Condemn Israeli Settlements.

It seems to me the thread is about what the UN voted to do, not just what the US decided not to do.

I guess you're trying to make it about something else.
Click to expand...

Nope.
 
ocean515 said:
LOL

Well that makes it about as clear as a mud puddle.
Click to expand...

It is about the settlements in the WB. Why you fail to understand this is beyond me.
 
JANFU said:
It is about the settlements in the WB. Why you fail to understand this is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Well yes. I offered my opinion about their vote, and the UN in general. Why you're struggling with that is beyond me.
 
ocean515 said:
Well yes. I offered my opinion about their vote, and the UN in general. Why you're struggling with that is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Are any settlements in the WB illegal international law??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom