Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump Sets His Sights on Iran, Now that Attempted War with North Korea has Backfired

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    1) The National World December 4 2017


    "Palestinians have been lobbying regional leaders to oppose the decision " (= the transfer of the embassy ).

    2) The position of the Trump administtration does NOT align with that of Israel :the Trump administration acknowledges the reality , which is that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel .

    3 ) There are NO negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians : the Palestinians, supported by almost all Muslims, want to de stroy Israel and exterminate ALL Jews, not only those in Israel ,something Israel does not support .

    4) It is NOT in the interest of the USA to be objective (= neutral) in the war between its ally (Israel ) and the enemies of Israel (= Muslims ) who are also the enemies of the USA :afaics, 9/11 was NOT the work of the Mossad .

    5 ) Even if Israel was not an ally of the USA and the Muslims not the enemies of the USA, it would still be in the interest of the USA to support Israel,because an attempt by the Muslims to destroy Israel will result in a nuclear war,who will result in dozens of millions of victims in the ME and Europe, the destruction of the world economy and of the USA and the advent of a barbarian regime that will last not for centuries, but for millenaries .

    The more concessions Israel would do,the more eager will be the Muslims in their attempt to destroy Israel .
    your number 2 and number 4 lead to the conclusion that Trump does not act in a way that supports the US interests. This is what YOU said, not me.
    And I am still waiting for the proof of the "Muslim lobby" that stopped the transfer of embassy to Jerusalem...

    Meanwhile, let me remind you some Security Council Resolutions because apparently when WE violate their spirit nobody seems to bother.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...Resolution_478

    United Nations Security Council Resolution 478, adopted on 20 August 1980, is one of seven UNSC resolutions condemning Israel's attempted annexation of East Jerusalem. In particular, UNSC res 478 notes Israel's non-compliance with UNSC res 476[1] and condemned Israel's 1980 Jerusalem Law which declared Jerusalem to be Israel's "complete and united" capital, as a violation of international law. The resolution states that the Council will not recognize this law, and calls on member states to accept the decision of the council. This resolution also calls upon member states to withdraw their diplomatic missions from the city.
    The resolution was passed with 14 votes to none against, with the United States abstaining.
    Bold mine...

    And the following link hs the actual document if you want to verify it...

    https://undocs.org/S/RES/478(1980)
    Last edited by pamak; 04 Apr 18, 12:53.
    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

    Comment


    • #62
      USA are not obliged to follow the orders of the UNO,neither is Israel .

      In 1995 Congress voted a law about the transfer of the embassy to Jerusalem,it lasted til 2017 before a president had the guts to execute this law and not to be afraid of CAIR .

      What is more important : a law voted by Congress or a resolution of the SC ,which was voted when Jew hater Carter was president ?

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by ljadw View Post
        USA are not obliged to follow the orders of the UNO,neither is Israel .

        In 1995 Congress voted a law about the transfer of the embassy to Jerusalem,it lasted til 2017 before a president had the guts to execute this law and not to be afraid of CAIR .

        What is more important : a law voted by Congress or a resolution of the SC ,which was voted when Jew hater Carter was president ?

        Bold mine...

        Did you notice that I gave you a resolution by the United Nations Security Council and not by the UN General Assembly?
        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by pamak View Post
          Bold mine...

          Did you notice that I gave you a resolution by the United Nations Security Council and not by the UN General Assembly?
          And, there is no obligation on the part of the US, or for that matter any country, to follow what the UN says. UN resolutions are only as good as the member nation's willingness to follow them or force another country to do so. The UN has no enforcement means on its own. It can't tax or fine. It doesn't have police or military power to do anything.

          In short, the UN is a "gentleman's" debating society and nothing more.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
            And, there is no obligation on the part of the US, or for that matter any country, to follow what the UN says. UN resolutions are only as good as the member nation's willingness to follow them or force another country to do so. The UN has no enforcement means on its own. It can't tax or fine. It doesn't have police or military power to do anything.

            In short, the UN is a "gentleman's" debating society and nothing more.
            Bold mine...

            Ohh yes, there is when it is UN Security Council Resolutions!

            They are bidding according to the UN principles.

            I suspect what you want to say that the US (and any superpower or permanent member of the Security Council) cannot be forced to play by the same rules as other countries or suffer the consequences for such resolution violations since it can block any sanctions or other measures against it.
            Last edited by pamak; 04 Apr 18, 15:50.
            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by pamak View Post
              Bold mine...

              Ohh yes, there is when it is UN Security Council Resolutions!

              They are bidding according to the UN principles.

              I suspect what you want to say that the US (and any superpower or permanent member of the Security Council) cannot be forced to play by the same rules as other countries or suffer the consequences for such resolution violations since it can block any sanctions or other measures against it.
              No there isn't. What's the UN going to do? Send Trump a strongly worded letter? Maybe tell ambassador Haley she can't come to the coffee klatch next time?
              Trump has more teeth that. He could tell the UN "No more US funds for you!" Or, maybe tell New York they can treat UN diplomats as persona non grata and arrest them for too many parking tickets, etc., as after all the UN is just an expensive gentleman's club after all.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                No there isn't. What's the UN going to do? Send Trump a strongly worded letter? Maybe tell ambassador Haley she can't come to the coffee klatch next time?
                Trump has more teeth that. He could tell the UN "No more US funds for you!" Or, maybe tell New York they can treat UN diplomats as persona non grata and arrest them for too many parking tickets, etc., as after all the UN is just an expensive gentleman's club after all.
                Yes, there IS an obligation to follow the UN Security Council Resolutions!

                This is from the UN Charter

                Article 25
                The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.
                The US is still a member of the United Nations, right?

                For the second part regarding what the UN can do if the US (or any other superpower) refuses to abide with the UN Security Council resolutions, the answer is nothing. But this does not mean that there are no obligations. This is like asking what the UN can do with the violation of human rights in China , which is a permanent member of the Security Council. The answer is nothing! But this does not mean that there is not a principle of human rights that China should honor as a member of the UN!
                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by pamak View Post
                  Yes, there IS an obligation to follow the UN Security Council Resolutions!

                  This is from the UN Charter



                  The US is still a member of the United Nations, right?

                  For the second part regarding what the UN can do if the US (or any other superpower) refuses to abide with the UN Security Council resolutions, the answer is nothing. But this does not mean that there are no obligations. This is like asking what the UN can do with the violation of human rights in China , which is a permanent member of the Security Council. The answer is nothing! But this does not mean that there is not a principle of human rights that China should honor as a member of the UN!
                  Tell me how the UN will enforce that if a member objects or ignores them.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    The UN is only as strong as a country or countries that are willing to support it considering that it's mostly 3rd world countries that are obsessed with attacking Israel a Jewish State they shouldn't get too concerned with listening to the UN.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      Tell me how the UN will enforce that if a member objects or ignores them.
                      Just because the UN cannot enforce a principle, it does not mean that it does not exist. This is why I brought the example of human rights and China. The latter as a permanent member of the UNSC can veto any decision trying to enforce in some way the respect of human rights by the Chinese government (say through sanctions). But just because the Chinese government can avoid such attempts to enforce a UN principle, it does not mean that the principle itself does not exist and that the UN accepts that the Chinese are above the UN Charter and can do whatever they want with respect of the human rights...
                      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        The SC is not the government of the world .

                        And the UN are an union of dictatorships talking about democracy .

                        Only a minority of the world population lives in democracy,the majority is ruled, not reluctantly, by dictators ,who do not care about human rights .

                        It would maybe be indicated to look at the reality,which is that most of the world population consider human rights as an invention by western countries and they dislike the attempts from western countries to impose this invention at them .

                        Look at the sanctions against NK : reality is that they are evaded massively, by those countries who voted them .

                        It was the same for Iran:every one was doing business with Khomeini, US included .

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by pamak View Post
                          Just because the UN cannot enforce a principle, it does not mean that it does not exist..
                          Principles who can not be enforced exist only on paper and in books written by professors from Princeton who started a second career in politics .

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            Tell me how the UN will enforce that if a member objects or ignores them.
                            They will send David Hogg

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by III Corps View Post
                              Trump Deflection Syndrome.
                              Isn't that the truth.

                              Trump is growing increasingly erratic when it comes to foreign policy. Now he wants to pull out of Syria and is meeting resistance from the generals.

                              He is trying to do what he criticized Obama for-giving the enemy a heads-up on a proposed US withdrawal.

                              He's not only ignorant and none too bright, he is also a hypocrite.

                              https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/04/polit...ops/index.html
                              We are not now that strength which in old days
                              Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                              Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                              To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Massena View Post
                                Isn't that the truth.

                                Trump is growing increasingly erratic when it comes to foreign policy. Now he wants to pull out of Syria and is meeting resistance from the generals.

                                He is trying to do what he criticized Obama for-giving the enemy a heads-up on a proposed US withdrawal.

                                He's not only ignorant and none too bright, he is also a hypocrite.

                                https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/04/polit...ops/index.html
                                A lot of nonsense and lies : Trump does not want to pull out of Syria .

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X