US declines to veto UN resolution on Israeli settlements...

[Anonymous]

Judging by the UN ambassador he's selected, I'd say Trump doesn't care one whit about the U.N. or the international community.

We'll see how that plays out for the U.S. going forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does the US pay 1/5 of UN budget?

If you are asking the number, it is based on GDP and other economic factors that determine ability to pay.

If you are asking why we bother, I guess you would have to ask why we seek its backing on so many international issues, from peacekeeping to sanctions to support for the first Gulf War to the final ultimatum leading up to the second gulf war. When we have the UN behind us, we have legitimacy that does not come from going our own way. If we didn't believe in it, we wouldn't be citing UN resolutions so often.

NP. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. Useful resolutions can be cited. Others can be ignored.

[Anonymous]

Hurrah for the abstention (at last, but I just wish we could claw back all that money that we send to Israel, which takes the money and then disregards everything our leaders ask them to consider. Their religion gives them no divine right to Palestinian land, as much as they like to pretend otherwise. The fact that we commit to give Israel billions of dollars of aid when people in this country desperately need help makes me want to vomit. We truly are being raped by AIPAC and the Israeli lobby year after year after year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does the US pay 1/5 of UN budget?

If you are asking the number, it is based on GDP and other economic factors that determine ability to pay.

If you are asking why we bother, I guess you would have to ask why we seek its backing on so many international issues, from peacekeeping to sanctions to support for the first Gulf War to the final ultimatum leading up to the second gulf war. When we have the UN behind us, we have legitimacy that does not come from going our own way. If we didn't believe in it, we wouldn't be citing UN resolutions so often.

NP. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. Useful resolutions can be cited. Others can be ignored.

Or you could go with a really crazy idea why we pay so much....we created the thing to replace the League of Nations.
Oh, yeah - it sounds like a comic book but its true.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

I disagree this impacts anything for policy other than annoying Israel and creating more paperwork and wasted time in the future. If Obama wanted to do anything big in his term he just would have offered to claim eminent domain moved Israel to New Jersey. It would be a lot cheaper in the near term and long term and been a potential sustainable peace solution that the world would have applauded and probably awarded him Nobel Peace Prizes in perpetuity for.

Israel abandoned the 2 state solution in the early 50's - it is all just talk to make people feel better about themselves. I think the Palestinians and Muslims in general in the region should prepare for things to get a lot more one sided against them in the near term. Trump works some deals with Putin, ME goes in a form of lock down with Russia "protecting" them from dire Israeli/US policy. ISIS/Extremists are rounded up with dictators du jour. Russia keeps Iran in check. Israel continues to flourish. About 5 years or so later you have 10x the level of animosity against Israel and US and things get bad. Odds are Russia comes in as our ally to help the war of civilizations and ergo a weird WW3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

I disagree this impacts anything for policy other than annoying Israel and creating more paperwork and wasted time in the future. If Obama wanted to do anything big in his term he just would have offered to claim eminent domain moved Israel to New Jersey. It would be a lot cheaper in the near term and long term and been a potential sustainable peace solution that the world would have applauded and probably awarded him Nobel Peace Prizes in perpetuity for.

Israel abandoned the 2 state solution in the early 50's - it is all just talk to make people feel better about themselves. I think the Palestinians and Muslims in general in the region should prepare for things to get a lot more one sided against them in the near term. Trump works some deals with Putin, ME goes in a form of lock down with Russia "protecting" them from dire Israeli/US policy. ISIS/Extremists are rounded up with dictators du jour. Russia keeps Iran in check. Israel continues to flourish. About 5 years or so later you have 10x the level of animosity against Israel and US and things get bad. Odds are Russia comes in as our ally to help the war of civilizations and ergo a weird WW3.

Are you suggesting that the US move Israel to New Jersey? Any reason why you mention that state?

[Anonymous]

Geographically New Jersey is the same size as Israel. Newark and Trenton do not have quite the rich history as Jerusalem may be an issue.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

Well said Jeff. Israel's own choices will be its downfall. Good friends don't let others go driving when they are drunk. We must force their hand to avert this disaster but I fear the next incoming administration will only make matters worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Geographically New Jersey is the same size as Israel. Newark and Trenton do not have quite the rich history as Jerusalem may be an issue.

We should just relocate Garden Staters to neighboring states like Pennsylvania and New York, where they can live in mass refugee camps.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

Don't be so obtuse. If what you're saying is true, than the U.S. should have voted in favor of the resolution, not abstain. An abstention which would have changed the outcome of the vote might be a nuanced way of making a point. An abstention which has the same effect of a "yes" vote is cowardice. Showing cowardice on the international stage in no way serves U.S. interests. It makes us look as if Obama wanted to throw Israel under the bus out of personal spite due to his differences with Bibi, knowing that he was on his way out, so there'd be no political repercussions for him to worry about, yet still be able to say that he didn't vote "for" the resolution. Obama is such a worthless piece of drek, good riddance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

Don't be so obtuse. If what you're saying is true, than the U.S. should have voted in favor of the resolution, not abstain. An abstention which would have changed the outcome of the vote might be a nuanced way of making a point. An abstention which has the same effect of a "yes" vote is cowardice. Showing cowardice on the international stage in no way serves U.S. interests. It makes us look as if Obama wanted to throw Israel under the bus out of personal spite due to his differences with Bibi, knowing that he was on his way out, so there'd be no political repercussions for him to worry about, yet still be able to say that he didn't vote "for" the resolution. Obama is such a worthless piece of drek, good riddance.

An abstention is less of a slap in the face to Israel.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:The only time Presidents feel safe to do this sort of thing in when they are the lamest of ducks. But, it's better than nothing I guess. Good job Obama.

Interesting you say this Jeff. I thought you denied the power of the Israeli lobby and Jewish influence in American politics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

Don't be so obtuse. If what you're saying is true, than the U.S. should have voted in favor of the resolution, not abstain. An abstention which would have changed the outcome of the vote might be a nuanced way of making a point. An abstention which has the same effect of a "yes" vote is cowardice. Showing cowardice on the international stage in no way serves U.S. interests. It makes us look as if Obama wanted to throw Israel under the bus out of personal spite due to his differences with Bibi, knowing that he was on his way out, so there'd be no political repercussions for him to worry about, yet still be able to say that he didn't vote "for" the resolution. Obama is such a worthless piece of drek, good riddance.

An abstention is less of a slap in the face to Israel.

You don't think they deserved to be slapped and put in their place?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Good job Obama"? How does abstaining serve the U.S.'s national interests in any way?

It serves US interests by showing that we support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. If Israel continues to steal all the Palestinian land, there won't be room for a Palestinian state. Israel is then left with two options: forceful expulsion of the Palestinians or Apartheid. Some would argue that Israel has already chosen Apartheid.

As the vote shows, there is no international support for Israeli settlements. Even in the US there is not much support. It serves US interests not to be isolated from world opinion, especially at a time when we are attempting to argue against foreign occupations by Russia.

Don't be so obtuse. If what you're saying is true, than the U.S. should have voted in favor of the resolution, not abstain. An abstention which would have changed the outcome of the vote might be a nuanced way of making a point. An abstention which has the same effect of a "yes" vote is cowardice. Showing cowardice on the international stage in no way serves U.S. interests. It makes us look as if Obama wanted to throw Israel under the bus out of personal spite due to his differences with Bibi, knowing that he was on his way out, so there'd be no political repercussions for him to worry about, yet still be able to say that he didn't vote "for" the resolution. Obama is such a worthless piece of drek, good riddance.

An abstention is less of a slap in the face to Israel.

Disagree. It was a huge middle finger to Israel. And, part of Obama’s destructive legacy.
And, as others have said, it was a cowardly vote. Kind of like Obama voting “present.”

[Anonymous]

Power's "abstention speech" was pretty bad, too.