Cripes Israel, lay off a bit.

[JCM]

They have made numerous attempts to have peace with the Palestinians, all of which were broken by the Palestinians.

Bullshit. They are a)on Palestinian land, b)not allowing any peacekeeping or human rights inspection group, c)letting Palestinians live in what can be equaled to concentration camps, and time after time cutting off electricity, water and food,and has had thousands of complaints of human rights abuses

Israel itself now isn't accepting any ceasefire, and as usual, counting on the USv eto to attack and take more land, and I'd be glad to bet that there will be some more settlers in Palestinian lands. Again, I suggest you comfy Fox viewers to travel there and compare the life of a palestinian to of an Israeli,

They constantly have rockets and missiles fired at their land, its about damn time they try to teach these terrorists a lesson

Funnily, the same quote can be applied to Palestinians on the other side, teaching Israel a lesson.

Because the UN did SUCH a good job in Africa, right?

[/quote]I forgot, Fox news only shows the occasional corruption, and never shows billions in food, medicine and educational aid given,nor millions of lives saved.

While the UN is not perfect, it has done more humanitarian work than any other organization, and has saved much more than anyone (with the Red Cross a close second). What have you done for humanity, may I ask?

 

[blotsfan]

They have made numerous attempts to have peace with the Palestinians, all of which were broken by the Palestinians.

Bullshit. They are a)on Palestinian land, b)not allowing any peacekeeping or human rights inspection group, c)letting Palestinians live in what can be equaled to concentration camps, and time after time cutting off electricity, water and food,and has had thousands of complaints of human rights abuses

Israel itself now isn't accepting any ceasefire, and as usual, counting on the USv eto to attack and take more land, and I'd be glad to bet that there will be some more settlers in Palestinian lands. Again, I suggest you comfy Fox viewers to travel there and compare the life of a palestinian to of an Israeli,

They constantly have rockets and missiles fired at their land, its about damn time they try to teach these terrorists a lesson

Funnily, the same quote can be applied to Palestinians on the other side, teaching Israel a lesson.


[quote:1nhcd7us]Because the UN did SUCH a good job in Africa, right?

[/quote:1nhcd7us]I forgot, Fox news only shows the occasional corruption, and never shows billions in food, medicine and educational aid given,nor millions of lives saved.

While the UN is not perfect, it has done more humanitarian work than any other organization, and has saved much more than anyone (with the Red Cross a close second). What have you done for humanity, may I ask? [/quote]
Should I remind you that the Gaza strip was part of Israel. The reason that the Palestinians have control over is was because the Israelis gave it to them as part of a ceasefire agreement (gee, what happened to that?).
Comparing the situations that the Palestinians live in to the concentration camps shows a huge amount of ignorance and disrespect, though I guess I shouldn't expect more from a self-righteous MSNBC viewer(see? I can make stupid and wrong generalizations too). People are forgetting that the Israelis let food and medical supplies into the Gaza right before they started the invasion. You know, if all Israel cared about was getting more land, why were they willing to give up the Sinai to make peace with Egypt? Or give up the Gaza Strip to make peace with the Palestinians. Yeah, the Gaza was a part of Israel. Israel could have done these attacks the moment the Intifada, but they tied to make peace diplomatically, something the Palestinians have shown time and time again, that they don't really care about. Why should Israel let these people who have done nothing to show that they really want peace continue attacking them?
Oh, and you could say that the Palestinians are teaching the Israelis a lesson. However, there is one major difference: The Palestinians attack civilians, the Israelis attack the terrorists. Yes Palestinian civilians are dying, but that is not the goal of the Israeli army. Pretty tough for Palestinians to say that when they fire into civilian areas with intent to kill civilians.
Yes Israel is not perfect, but they're a hell of a lot better than the Palestinians.

 

[Mr_Chaz]

The reason that the Palestinians have control over is was because the Israelis gave it to them as part of a ceasefire agreement (gee, what happened to that?)

The same thing that happens to the Gaza borders every few years: Israel bulldozed over it because one person in a nearby settlement might have been possibly responsible for firing a rocket that could have nearly killed an Israeli civilian.

It's not Israel responding that riles me up, it's the scale of the response.

 

[JCM]

Agreed Chaz.

Heck, you'd be amazed what Israel could do with a UN base and proper peacekeeping with Israeli intelligence working from within Gaza. Instead they just blow up stuff and leave more Palestinians without electricity, water or a home, thus feeding more volunteers for Hamas and Fatah.

Its like a bloody circle that never ends.

People are forgetting that the Israelis let food and medical supplies into the Gaza right before they started the invasion.

International pressure, and after Israel disrupting water supply, electricity and essential infrastructure for the millionth time. Whopeedo, thats why humanright watch is showing -Gazan hospitals say that they are are completely out of even the most basic medical supplies and have little or no capacity to deal with further casualties. In addition, Israeli ground forces entered Gaza on Saturday causing an immediate spike in casualties and even attacks on the hospitals and paramedics themselves.

You know, if all Israel cared about was getting more land, why were they willing to give up the Sinai to make peace with Egypt?

Because Kissinger offered them supplies of weapons and monetary aid,which continues to this day.

Or give up the Gaza Strip to make peace with the Palestinians.

A token to say that they were giving back land, never mind Israel would keep more than 90% of occupied land.

Yeah, the Gaza was a part of Israel.

Check again.

Israel could have done these attacks the moment the Intifada, but they tied to make peace diplomatically, something the Palestinians have shown time and time again, that they don't really care about.

BS again. They sat down and talked seriously ONCE, with Clinton, then refused to give back more than 30% of occupied land, and to let a Palestinian state be declared officially, the two biggest talking point. To be fair, Arafat wasn't with power to agree to anything anyway, so even if Israel had agreed and Arafat signed anything, nothing wpuld happen.

Isreal is as much in the wrong as Palestine here, I suggest traveling there before talking blabber I've seen first-hand as BS propaganda, or reading a few history books. I wont cry for most false Palestinians there, nor Fatah and Hamas, nor Israelis who aren't against occupation and the heavy-handed attacks and human right abuses.

 

[blotsfan]

Agreed Chaz.

Heck, you'd be amazed what Israel could do with a UN base and proper peacekeeping with Israeli intelligence working from within Gaza. Instead they just blow up stuff and leave more Palestinians without electricity, water or a home, thus feeding more volunteers for Hamas and Fatah.

Its like a bloody circle that never ends.

People are forgetting that the Israelis let food and medical supplies into the Gaza right before they started the invasion.

International pressure, and after Israel disrupting water supply, electricity and essential infrastructure for the millionth time. Whopeedo.

You know, if all Israel cared about was getting more land, why were they willing to give up the Sinai to make peace with Egypt?

Because Kissinger offered them supplies of weapons and monetary aid,which continues to this day.
[quote:xj00l6qo]Or give up the Gaza Strip to make peace with the Palestinians.

A token to say that they were giving back land, never mind Israel would keep more than 90% of occupied land.

Yeah, the Gaza was a part of Israel.

Check again.

Israel could have done these attacks the moment the Intifada, but they tied to make peace diplomatically, something the Palestinians have shown time and time again, that they don't really care about.

BS again. They sat down and talked ONCE, with Clinton, then refused to give back more than 30% of occupied land, and to let a Palestinian state be declared officially, the two biggest talking point.
Jesus, its amazing how you untraveled Fox viewers not only have never been there, but also dont seemto know anything about the region but whats spoonfed to you.

Isreal is as much in the wrong as Palestine here, I suggest selling the Xbox, HDTV and traveling there before talking blabber I've seen first-hand as BS propaganda, or reading a few history books.[/quote:xj00l6qo]
JCM, wanna take a guess as to where I was this summer? Untraveled my ass.

 

[Ravenpoe]

I think the problem in understanding the situation over there, for many, comes from trying to identify a 'good guy' and a 'bad guy'. There isn't one. Just two factions who hate each other and are going to bomb the shit out of each other no matter what.

I'm not going to claim to understand it either. I know the history, but I know next to nothing about the cultural conflicts and other driving forces that ensure that this death machine continues into eternity. I only know, from simple observation, that it will. Hamas is a dick, and they know just how to get Isreal to react in ways that only strengthen the Hamas sympathy in the area. And Isreal is a dick, who are more than happy to play into that just to swing their military might and blow shit up.

Personally, as an American, I would like to see my country lean a little more heavily on Isreal to allow better diplomacy and peacekeeping missions. I understand the value of our alliance with Isreal, but Isreal also knows the value in having us as an ally, and I would like to see our government use that to their advantage to attempt to put a leash on the isreali military machine.

The situation is fucked up. The attempt to fix it (founding of Isreal) just made things fucking worse. But that can't be undone. Both sides need to calm the fuck down, and have the weight of the allies that they rely upon to lean on them and convince them to do so.

Just my humble view. If there are any glaring flaws in logic or assumption, I'm open to being educated in what there are.

 

[Icarus]

Remember to keep the true distinction in mind.

Unfortunately the reality is often THIS:

Israel bombs buildings without being sure there's terrorists present. They've killed families of terrorists including babies, they've opened fire on schools killing children for no reason, they have blown kids to pieces for throwing rocks, etc. etc. etc.

Heck, a few years back there was a documentary and the reporter went to visit the school. A few infantry soldiers came walking down the street and the teacher quickly told all kids to hide under their desks. The reporter said "surely they won't harm you - they're just there as a sign of authority". So all the kids get out from under the desks and class continues while the soldiers are standing outside the school. Suddenly they opened fire at the school - right in front of the camera, a 6 year old girl got a bullet right in her head. None of the camera crew got harmed but several kids were badly wounded and a few were killed. Shocked, the reporter went over to the soldier who spouted racist bullshit, calling all Palestinians dogs & pigs & whatever and his colleague threatened the reporter to leave or he'd end up like the kids. This was in front of a CAMERA. God knows what else they pull off when there's none around.

That's just one of the many documentaries or amateur clips I've seen that show the real behavior of Israel soldiers. Palestinians are treated as scum and criminals everywhere they go. There's no way for any Palestinian kid to grow up not hating them because of what they see. Every check point is filled with soldiers throwing insults and threats at even old ladies and infants.

So yeah, they're just as bad really except they got bigger guns.

 

[JCM]

Remember to keep the true distinction in mind.

Unfortunately the reality is often THIS:

Israel bombs buildings without being sure there's terrorists present. They've killed families of terrorists including babies, they've opened fire on schools killing children for no reason, they have blown kids to pieces for throwing rocks, etc. etc. etc.

Heck, a few years back there was a documentary and the reporter went to visit the school. A few infantry soldiers came walking down the street and the teacher quickly told all kids to hide under their desks. The reporter said "surely they won't harm you - they're just there as a sign of authority". So all the kids get out from under the desks and class continues while the soldiers are standing outside the school. Suddenly they opened fire at the school - right in front of the camera, a 6 year old girl got a bullet right in her head. None of the camera crew got harmed but several kids were badly wounded and a few were killed. Shocked, the reporter went over to the soldier who spouted racist bullshit, calling all Palestinians dogs & pigs & whatever and his colleague threatened the reporter to leave or he'd end up like the kids. This was in front of a CAMERA. God knows what else they pull off when there's none around.

That's just one of the many documentaries or amateur clips I've seen that show the real behavior of Israel soldiers. Palestinians are treated as scum and criminals everywhere they go. There's no way for any Palestinian kid to grow up not hating them because of what they see. Every check point is filled with soldiers throwing insults and threats at even old ladies and infants.

So yeah, they're just as bad really except they got bigger guns.

Both drawings are basically correct, heck, if you play them in sequence, one after another, its pretty much what happens there.

Agreed Chaz.

Heck, you'd be amazed what Israel could do with a UN base and proper peacekeeping with Israeli intelligence working from within Gaza. Instead they just blow up stuff and leave more Palestinians without electricity, water or a home, thus feeding more volunteers for Hamas and Fatah.

Its like a bloody circle that never ends.

People are forgetting that the Israelis let food and medical supplies into the Gaza right before they started the invasion.

International pressure, and after Israel disrupting water supply, electricity and essential infrastructure for the millionth time. Whopeedo.

You know, if all Israel cared about was getting more land, why were they willing to give up the Sinai to make peace with Egypt?

Because Kissinger offered them supplies of weapons and monetary aid,which continues to this day.
[quote:e7im6rjh]Or give up the Gaza Strip to make peace with the Palestinians.

A token to say that they were giving back land, never mind Israel would keep more than 90% of occupied land.
[quote:e7im6rjh]Yeah, the Gaza was a part of Israel.

Check again.

Israel could have done these attacks the moment the Intifada, but they tied to make peace diplomatically, something the Palestinians have shown time and time again, that they don't really care about.

BS again. They sat down and talked ONCE, with Clinton, then refused to give back more than 30% of occupied land, and to let a Palestinian state be declared officially, the two biggest talking point.
Jesus, its amazing how you untraveled Fox viewers not only have never been there, but also dont seemto know anything about the region but whats spoonfed to you.

Isreal is as much in the wrong as Palestine here, I suggest selling the Xbox, HDTV and traveling there before talking blabber I've seen first-hand as BS propaganda, or reading a few history books.[/quote:e7im6rjh]
JCM, wanna take a guess as to where I was this summer? Untraveled my ass.[/quote:e7im6rjh]$50 its not Palestine, nor Beirut, and unless you've been to much of Middle East, Asia, Africa and Latin America, you're untraveled to me, just from your posts I can see you dont know anything about Israel, Kissinger or the whole realpoltik gamble that brought US into this Catch22 (damned if you support Isreal, damned if you dont)

But I love how you ran away from your BS, just as I was rounding up the border agreements, every single treaty broken by Israel and Red Cross' report, I really suggest traveling there, because from EXPERIENCE I know two people, one who think that Isreal have done no wrong, and those who have been to Palestine and seen the concentration camp-like existence they lead.

 

[Bubble181]

Comparing Gaza to the camps may be going too far - but the situation really isn't any better than it was in the WWII ghettos - in fact, some Israeli brass have even stated that this was their intention.
Anyway, the only time they were ever anywhere close to peace was with Rabin. And we all know how *that* ended, right? (For those who don't: he was an Israeli prime minister making a peace deal that both sides could somewhat agree on, except of course for the both extremists. An extreme right-wing Israeli killed him).
The sad thing is that both Fatah and Hamas didn't start out as terrorist organisations - both have done - and despite what you might think, continue to do - a lot of good work.

Anyway, I agree mostly with JCM here, so I'll leave it to him :-P

 

[JCM]

I did say concentration camp-like life, with guard patrols,inspeactions,lack of sanitation and et al included.

However, I find it funny that the media is so bent there, that nobody even noticed the fact that Isreal went back on the ceasefire agreement, and didnt stop the blockade of Gaza as it was supposed to.

It was the main reason Fatah agreed to the ceasefire anyway, they stop the full-scale infitadah, Israel stops the blockade so Palestinians can get some commerce happening and access to medication. Only thing is, Isreal didnt stop the blockade at all, even after Fatah fulfilled its part of the agreement, and UN declared it against human rights, and released a statement calling for Israel to lift its "siege" on the Gaza Strip, allow the continued supply of food, fuel, and medicine, and reopen border crossings.

SIXTH SPECIAL SESSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
COUNCIL CONCLUDES WITH CALL ON ISRAEL
TO END SIEGE IMPOSED ON OCCUPIED
GAZA STRIP
http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane. ... endocument

By the way, this is only the 15th condemnation by UN against Isreal in the past 2 years, also the 15 vetoed by USA.

And then people wonder why most of the world hates the US in relation to Israal?

 

[Mr_Chaz]

A few items from (what I consider the closest we can get to) an unbiased source that might not have made it to the states (they might, they might not, I don't know so I thought they might be worth posting.

An example if Israel not quite managing to kill Terrorists
What's it like inside Palestine?
And from that article for those without the time/inclination to read it...

Israel has imposed a crippling blockade on Gaza for the past 18 months, allowing little more than humanitarian basics into the coastal territory.

Health, energy and water infrastructure were already close to breaking point before the fighting broke out.

Israel has stopped maintaining, as it did for the first week of the operation, that there is "no humanitarian crisis" in the territory.

And they're trying to reduce the scale of the crisis you say?

That'll do me for now. Let me know if you want examples of anything else. I'll even happily use other sources if you're uncomfortable with the BBC.
And for a last link, how about an example of how brilliantly Israel are identifying Hamas?

 

[Sparhawk]

Thought that this would go well here

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articl ... 198/19734/

 

[Idocreating]

The policy on both sides seems to be, "Whatever you do to us, we'll pay back tenfold. Today, if we can, but if we can't do it today then we'll remember it for tomorrow." Presto, constant escalation and unending hatred on both sides.

Situations like these make me think maybe a global dictatorship really has its advantages, the world ruler could just say "Play nice or I annihilate you both. I don't care who started it, I'll finish it."

I think I'd make a great world dictator, now that I think about it.

Agreed in full. The UN should just force them to agree to a permanent ceasefire. Either of them breaks it and the whole region eats a nuke.

 

[Icarus]

The policy on both sides seems to be, "Whatever you do to us, we'll pay back tenfold. Today, if we can, but if we can't do it today then we'll remember it for tomorrow." Presto, constant escalation and unending hatred on both sides.

Situations like these make me think maybe a global dictatorship really has its advantages, the world ruler could just say "Play nice or I annihilate you both. I don't care who started it, I'll finish it."

I think I'd make a great world dictator, now that I think about it.

Agreed in full. The UN should just force them to agree to a permanent ceasefire. Either of them breaks it and the whole region eats a nuke.

Aaaaaaaand guess which fantastic country has vetoed anything the UN ever came up with? I'll give you a hint, it starts with an U.

 

[bhamv]

The policy on both sides seems to be, "Whatever you do to us, we'll pay back tenfold. Today, if we can, but if we can't do it today then we'll remember it for tomorrow." Presto, constant escalation and unending hatred on both sides.

Situations like these make me think maybe a global dictatorship really has its advantages, the world ruler could just say "Play nice or I annihilate you both. I don't care who started it, I'll finish it."

I think I'd make a great world dictator, now that I think about it.

Agreed in full. The UN should just force them to agree to a permanent ceasefire. Either of them breaks it and the whole region eats a nuke.

Aaaaaaaand guess which fantastic country has vetoed anything the UN ever came up with? I'll give you a hint, it starts with an U.

Those gosh-darned Ugandans!

 

[Shawn]

People live in Wisconsin. There is nothing historic about it. They get along fine.

Just fucking let them kill each other and get it over with.

 

[Dusty668]

Gaza solution is possible - Blair

:lol: Bwahahahahahahaaaaa!

Yah right. There won't be peace in the mideast until all them pesky humans are gone.

 

[Futureking]

Oh, please. Palestine is just a mere puppet. The moment Palestinians stop voting for war loving politicians is the same moment peace arrives.

Just look at Anwar Sadat.

Let's see.

Declared war on Israel and killed many Israelites.

After a while, he realised that war is unsustainable and successfully negotiated peace with Israel, which led him to be branded a traitor by the Arab league. Never mind the fact that he actually successfully negotiated for Israel to give them Sinai, which was a lot of land and had a lot of oil reserves.

Note that Israel, which sustained heavy losses was actually winning the war at that time. This makes the favourable peace treaty seem more miraculous.

Dies from assassination.

CliffNotes: The same guy who declared war is the same guy who negotiated and signed an official peace treaty AND obtained Sinai. What happens to him? Declared a traitor and dies from assassination. The Arab league doesn't want peace. They want Israel gone.

 

[Icarus]

Oh, please. Palestine is just a mere puppet. The moment Palestinians stop voting for war loving politicians is the same moment peace arrives.

The same goes for Israel. Any president that is in favour of peace gets murdered by Israelites. Two sides of the same coin really. As I said, the only difference is that Israel has bigger guns and has US backing them.

 

[Futureking]

Oh, please. Palestine is just a mere puppet. The moment Palestinians stop voting for war loving politicians is the same moment peace arrives.

The same goes for Israel. Any president that is in favour of peace gets murdered by Israelites. Two sides of the same coin really. As I said, the only difference is that Israel has bigger guns and has US backing them.

I'll begin my point with Menachem Begin. He was the Prime Minister when the peace treaty was signed.

He struck Iraq after Saddam Hussein threatened Israel, and Lebanon after an Israel ambassador was almost assasinated. In fact, he was about to negotiate peace with Lebanon when Bachir Gameyel was assassinated. Gameyel had intentions to establish diplomatic relations with Israel, and was killed for wanting peace.

In fact, his failure to end the war with Lebanon was the main reason why he was forced to resign.

Oh, did I mention? Begin lived to an old age and died peacefully.

The only case where an Israel Prime Minister is assassinated is Yitzhak Rabin. The assassin was acting alone and unanimously condemned by the Jews.

 

[Icarus]

Oh, but you leave out the criticism that the leaders of Israel received when they wanted to negotiate piece. Remember the outcry when they were going to remove the settlers?

No matter how you look at it, Israel has the upper hand. They already own most of the country including the best areas. They got little to lose with a peace solution. The Palestinians on the other hand are living in crap circumstances and are not happy with the current situation. That is the real issue here - Israel wants to keep all the land while the Palestinians want land back which is unlikely when you see the crap storm that occurred when they were going to give back settled areas.

 

[JCM]

True, and within Israel itself there are extremists who call out that all of Israelis theirs, its a promise of god, and that all Palestinians should be sent away, and after Sharon, this militant right has actually gained more power within the government.

The policy on both sides seems to be, "Whatever you do to us, we'll pay back tenfold. Today, if we can, but if we can't do it today then we'll remember it for tomorrow." Presto, constant escalation and unending hatred on both sides.

Situations like these make me think maybe a global dictatorship really has its advantages, the world ruler could just say "Play nice or I annihilate you both. I don't care who started it, I'll finish it."

I think I'd make a great world dictator, now that I think about it.

Agreed in full. The UN should just force them to agree to a permanent ceasefire. Either of them breaks it and the whole region eats a nuke.

Aaaaaaaand guess which fantastic country has vetoed anything the UN ever came up with? I'll give you a hint, it starts with an U.

We have a winner.

As long as USA doesn't let go of the Truman doctrine and Henry Kissinger's failed Middle East plan, and instead allows a permanent UN base with peacekeeping working together with Palestinian and Israeli intelligence to stop terrorism, this WILL NEVER STOP.

And mind you, this, and also a detailed inventory of every weapon sold to the Israelis, with detailed explanations on how they kill, and even stuff like which American bulldozer was used by the Israelis to destroy which school, is show daily on Eastern TV networks, thus adding to the whole "he deserved it" view of the east when Sept 11 happened.

 

[GasBandit]

Because the UN did SUCH a good job in Africa, right?

I forgot, Fox news only shows the occasional corruption, and never shows billions in food, medicine and educational aid given,nor millions of lives saved.

While the UN is not perfect, it has done more humanitarian work than any other organization, and has saved much more than anyone (with the Red Cross a close second). What have you done for humanity, may I ask?

The issue is not what *I* have done, as I am not being touted as a solution to the middle east conflict. The UN is a great "humanitarian" provider, sure. But that's not what you're talking about. It's not so great a "peacekeeper." In fact, it's largely useless before and during conflict. Billions in food and medicine won't stop belligerents from riddling each other with 7.62 millimeter holes, and it's been shown that to an entity determined to cause carnage, a UN presence means exactly dick.

After all, look what a bang-up job their presence did of keeping the Rwandans from ethnically cleansing the shit out of each other.

 

[JCM]

Because the UN did SUCH a good job in Africa, right?

I forgot, Fox news only shows the occasional corruption, and never shows billions in food, medicine and educational aid given,nor millions of lives saved.

While the UN is not perfect, it has done more humanitarian work than any other organization, and has saved much more than anyone (with the Red Cross a close second). What have you done for humanity, may I ask?

The issue is not what *I* have done, as I am not being touted as a solution to the middle east conflict.

Its not being touted as THE solution, but a better solution than US losing face over and over as it agrees with whatever shit Israel comes up with. And UN, as flawed as it is, has stopped more wars and conflict, and helped more people than ANY government or group.

It's not so great a "peace keeper... blabla Rwanda

As I said, Fox news will slam Sudan, Rwanda and Timor, and the viewers forget that UN has had over 200 missions, with high profile successes in all-out wars like Suez Canal conflict, Hindo-Pakistani conflict, the Six Day war, Korea and Gulf War I, and even in the case of Rwanda, much more bloodshed would've happened without UN there. Most African missions were successful, democracies allowed to be established, and even in the unsuccessful one much bloodshed was avoided and refugees were helped, and police forces were trained, and overall in the world outside Africa and Timor, UN has had a pretty good track record of maintaining peace

I'm not even going to talk about conflicts avoided through diplomacy and trade agreements, and as usual, here's a nice list to awaken the Fox crowd-

UN peacekeeping missions in Africa

1960–1964 United Nations Operation in the Congo (ONUC)
1988–1991 United Nations Angola Verification Mission I
1989–1990 United Nations Transition Assistance Group Namibia
1991–1995 United Nations Angola Verification Mission II
1992–1994 United Nations Operation in Mozambique (
1992–1993 United Nations Operation in Somalia I
1993–1997 United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia
1993–1994 United Nations Observer Mission Uganda-Rwanda
1993–1996 United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda
1993–1995 United Nations Operation in Somalia II
1994 United Nations Aouzou Strip Observer Group in Libya
1995–1997 United Nations Angola Verification Mission III
1997–1999 United Nations Observer Mission in Angola
1998–1999 United Nations Observer Mission in Sierra Leone
1998–2000 United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic
1999–2005 United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL)
2000–2008 United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea
2004–2007 United Nations Operation in Burundi (ONUB)




Peacekeeping in the Americas

1965–1966 Mission of the Representative of the Secretary-General in the Dominican Republic
1989–1992 United Nations Observer Group in Central America (ONUCA)
1991–1995 United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador
1993–1996 United Nations Mission in Haiti
1996–1997 United Nations Support Mission in Haiti
1997 United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala
1997 United Nations Transition Mission in Haiti (UNTMIH)
1997–2000 United Nations Civilian Police Mission in Haiti (MIPONUH)
2000–2001 United Nations General Assembly International Civilian Support Mission in Haiti (MICAH)


Peacekeeping in Asia

1962–1963 United Nations Security Force in West New Guinea (UNSF)
1965–1966 United Nations India-Pakistan Observation Mission (UNIPOM)
1988–1990 United Nations Good Offices Mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan (UNGOMAP)
1991–1992 United Nations Advance Mission in Cambodia (UNAMIC)
1992–1993 United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC)
1994–2000 United Nations Mission of Observers in Tajikistan (UNMOT)
1999 United Nations Mission in East Timor (UNAMET)
1999–2002 The United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET)
2002–2005 United Nations Mission of Support in East Timor (UNMISET)


Peacekeeping in Europe

1992–1995 United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR)
1994–1996 United Nations Confidence Restoration Operation (UNCRO)
1995–2002 United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH)
1995–1999 United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP)
1996–1998 United Nations Transitional Authority in Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES)
1996–2002 United Nations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP)
1998 United Nations Civilian Police Support Group (UNPSG)


Peacekeeping in the Middle East

1956–1967 First United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF I)
1958 United Nations Observation Group in Lebanon (UNOGIL)
1962–1964 United Nations Yemen Observation Mission (UNYOM)
1973–1979 Second United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF II)
1988–1991 United Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group (UNIIMOG)
1991–2003 United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM)
Mind you, there'd be more in the Middle East if USA didn't veto any mission, may it be peacekeeping or humanitarian, by the UN, to Palestine, Lebanon or Israel.



Missions in place right now, avoiding conflict as we speak, and the date of initiation-
1948 United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) Egypt
1949 United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) yes, until today, UN is there
1974 United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) Golan Heights
1978 United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Funnily Israel killed many peacekeepers there
1964 United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP)
1991 United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO)
1993 United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG)
1999 United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK)
1999 United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC)
2003 United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)
2004 United Nations Operation in Côte d'Ivoire (UNOCI)
2004 United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)
2005 United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS)
2006 United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT)
2007 United Nations/African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID)
2007 United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad (MINURCAT)

So again Gasbandit,I say on UN's track record, its not perfect, but it will have a better success than the current USA policy, and again, Gas, what have you done for humanity?

 

[Mr_Chaz]

I would also say that the UN's presence in Rwanda wasn't there as a full-scale peace-keeping force. It probably should have been, but to say that the force didn't perform its job is harsh on them. Blame the UN for doing the wrong thing, but be careful not to say that they did nothing.

So taking that into account, perhaps instead of saying the UN can only mess up, consider what would happen if the UN came up with an appropriate action. I don't know what it is, but I'm not an international diplomat. What I do know is that, based on the history of UN peacekeeping forces (as pointed out by JCM), it would struggle to make the situation worse than it already is.

 

[GasBandit]

Because the UN did SUCH a good job in Africa, right?

I forgot, Fox news only shows the occasional corruption, and never shows billions in food, medicine and educational aid given,nor millions of lives saved.

While the UN is not perfect, it has done more humanitarian work than any other organization, and has saved much more than anyone (with the Red Cross a close second). What have you done for humanity, may I ask?

The issue is not what *I* have done, as I am not being touted as a solution to the middle east conflict.

Its not being touted as THE solution, but a better solution than US losing face over and over as it agrees with whatever shit Israel comes up with. And UN, as flawed as it is, has stopped more wars and conflict, and helped more people than ANY government or group.
[quote:7t9oxn05]It's not so great a "peace keeper... blabla Rwanda

As I said, Fox news will slam Sudan, Rwanda and Timor, and the viewers forget that UN has had over 200 missions, with high profile successes in all-out wars like Suez Canal conflict, Hindo-Pakistani conflict, the Six Day war, Korea and Gulf War I, and even in the case of Rwanda, much more bloodshed would've happened without UN there. Most African missions were successful, democracies allowed to be established, and even in the unsuccessful one much bloodshed was avoided and refugees were helped, and police forces were trained, and overall in the world outside Africa and Timor, UN has had a pretty good track record of maintaining peace
[/quote:7t9oxn05] Hark, is that the "We haven't had a terrorist attack since 9/11 so Dubya must be doing great protecting against terrorism" argument I hear, from the other direction? They've done a grand job outside of the times they've screwed up royally because they were helpless when the shit really started to hit the fan? Ok. Thing is, more shit hits more fans on a daily basis on Israel/Palestine than (randomly picking from your voluminous list) Cyprus experiences in a decade. The UN is a *joke*. With a terrible punch line. Not to mention a great many members of the general assembly have great antipathy for Israel. How many pages would the UN's sternly worded disapproval letter to Iran be, when Iran finally gets around to making good on their threats and manages to lob something massively destructive to the Mediterranean? No, currently nobody but the US can prop them up.

And hang on just a sec there professor... are you giving the UN credit for Korea and Gulf War 1?

So again Gasbandit,I say on UN's track record, its not perfect, but it will have a better success than the current USA policy, and again, Gas, what have you done for humanity?

Again with the meaningless and irrelevant "what have you done?" The choices are not "Put the UN in charge or buy Gas Bandit a plane ticket to Tel Aviv." Unless by "you" you mean the United States, in which case the question is laughable seeing as how we're the most charitable, most foreign-aid giving nation on the planet.

 

[JCM]

I would also say that the UN's presence in Rwanda wasn't there as a full-scale peace-keeping force. It probably should have been, but to say that the force didn't perform its job is harsh on them. Blame the UN for doing the wrong thing, but be careful not to say that they did nothing.

So taking that into account, perhaps instead of saying the UN can only mess up, consider what would happen if the UN came up with an appropriate action. I don't know what it is, but I'm not an international diplomat. What I do know is that, based on the history of UN peacekeeping forces (as pointed out by JCM), it would struggle to make the situation worse than it already is.

True, but watching Fox and friends blame UN for everything from Saddam to terrorism in the world, I wouldn't be surprised if lesser minds with a lack of history wouldn't end up saying the same

As I said, Fox news will slam Sudan, Rwanda and Timor, and the viewers forget that UN has had over 200 missions, with high profile successes in all-out wars like Suez Canal conflict, Hindo-Pakistani conflict, the Six Day war, Korea and Gulf War I, and even in the case of Rwanda, much more bloodshed would've happened without UN there. Most African missions were successful, democracies allowed to be established, and even in the unsuccessful one much bloodshed was avoided and refugees were helped, and police forces were trained, and overall in the world outside Africa and Timor, UN has had a pretty good track record of maintaining peace

UN peacekeeping missions in Africa

1960–1964 United Nations Operation in the Congo (ONUC)
1988–1991 United Nations Angola Verification Mission I
1989–1990 United Nations Transition Assistance Group Namibia
1991–1995 United Nations Angola Verification Mission II
1992–1994 United Nations Operation in Mozambique (
1992–1993 United Nations Operation in Somalia I
1993–1997 United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia
1993–1994 United Nations Observer Mission Uganda-Rwanda
1993–1996 United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda
1993–1995 United Nations Operation in Somalia II
1994 United Nations Aouzou Strip Observer Group in Libya
1995–1997 United Nations Angola Verification Mission III
1997–1999 United Nations Observer Mission in Angola
1998–1999 United Nations Observer Mission in Sierra Leone
1998–2000 United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic
1999–2005 United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL)
2000–2008 United Nations Mission in Ethiopia and Eritrea
2004–2007 United Nations Operation in Burundi (ONUB)




Peacekeeping in the Americas

1965–1966 Mission of the Representative of the Secretary-General in the Dominican Republic
1989–1992 United Nations Observer Group in Central America (ONUCA)
1991–1995 United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador
1993–1996 United Nations Mission in Haiti
1996–1997 United Nations Support Mission in Haiti
1997 United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala
1997 United Nations Transition Mission in Haiti (UNTMIH)
1997–2000 United Nations Civilian Police Mission in Haiti (MIPONUH)
2000–2001 United Nations General Assembly International Civilian Support Mission in Haiti (MICAH)


Peacekeeping in Asia

1962–1963 United Nations Security Force in West New Guinea (UNSF)
1965–1966 United Nations India-Pakistan Observation Mission (UNIPOM)
1988–1990 United Nations Good Offices Mission in Afghanistan and Pakistan (UNGOMAP)
1991–1992 United Nations Advance Mission in Cambodia (UNAMIC)
1992–1993 United Nations Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC)
1994–2000 United Nations Mission of Observers in Tajikistan (UNMOT)
1999 United Nations Mission in East Timor (UNAMET)
1999–2002 The United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET)
2002–2005 United Nations Mission of Support in East Timor (UNMISET)


Peacekeeping in Europe

1992–1995 United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR)
1994–1996 United Nations Confidence Restoration Operation (UNCRO)
1995–2002 United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH)
1995–1999 United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP)
1996–1998 United Nations Transitional Authority in Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES)
1996–2002 United Nations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka (UNMOP)
1998 United Nations Civilian Police Support Group (UNPSG)


Peacekeeping in the Middle East

1956–1967 First United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF I)
1958 United Nations Observation Group in Lebanon (UNOGIL)
1962–1964 United Nations Yemen Observation Mission (UNYOM)
1973–1979 Second United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF II)
1988–1991 United Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group (UNIIMOG)
1991–2003 United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM)
Mind you, there'd be more in the Middle East if USA didn't veto any mission, may it be peacekeeping or humanitarian, by the UN, to Palestine, Lebanon or Israel.



Missions in place right now, avoiding conflict as we speak, and the date of initiation-
1948 United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) Egypt
1949 United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) yes, until today, UN is there
1974 United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) Golan Heights
1978 United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Funnily Israel killed many peacekeepers there
1964 United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP)
1991 United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO)
1993 United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG)
1999 United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK)
1999 United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC)
2003 United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL)
2004 United Nations Operation in Côte d'Ivoire (UNOCI)
2004 United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)
2005 United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS)
2006 United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT)
2007 United Nations/African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID)
2007 United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad (MINURCAT)

Hark, *snip useless comparison*

Gas, what happened to you, are you running away from your own point?And using Bush, with the doubled terrorist actvity after Sept 11, as an example?

You said they did a shit job, and I put forth that they don't always do so, now you run away? Guess they dont teach about the Lebanon border conflicts, or the ethnic cleansing in Haiti, or the six-day war, Suez canal conflict, or the mass killings in Kosovo in school there? Or the tribal wars in most of Africa, which before, and if not for UN's presence, killed and would continue killing?

Or how about the Hindu-Pakistani ceasefire, which stopped a full-scale war between two countries, which lasted until today? Or how about forging peace in the Suez canal, which allowed commerce to bloom for half a century?

Guess what, UN did manage to reduce major conflicts, give humanitarian aid, and when allowed within its powers, stop the conflict altogether, whenever the US didn't veto them, that is (in the case of the Iran war, Iraq, Israel's attack of Beirut and Palestine .

And hang on just a sec there professor... are you giving the UN credit for Korea and Gulf War 1?

Let me guess, Fox tells you that US went alone on a horse with a six-shooter, and there weren't many others that died for that peace?



Go study about Resolution 678, and the coalition from 34 countries: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and USA, being an ally of Kuwait, allowed to lead.

Or go and study about Resolution 83 and United Nations Command, yes USA asked to lead, and they let USA lead, and guess who from other countries fought for UN in the Korean War?
Republic of Korea - 590,911
United Kingdom - 14,198
Canada - 6,146
Turkey - 5,453
Australia - 2,282
Philippines - 1,496
New Zealand - 1,385
Ethiopia - 1,271
Greece - 1,263
Thailand - 1,204
France - 1,119
Colombia - 1,068
Belgium - 900
South Africa - 826
The Netherlands - 819
Luxembourg - 11

USA was also allowed to establish permanent UN-sanctioned bases under different resolutions in both Kuwait and Korea. A good solution for Israel/Palestine.

So again Gasbandit,I say on UN's track record, its not perfect, but it will have a better success than the current USA policy, and again, Gas, what have you done for humanity?

Avoids answering[/quote]

The choices are not "Put the UN in charge or buy Gas Bandit a plane ticket to Tel Aviv." Unless by "you" you mean [quote:2hnnvmdm]the United States, in which case the question is laughable seeing as how we're the most charitable, most foreign-aid giving nation on the planet.

[/quote:2hnnvmdm]May I compare that with your military spending, and body count from conflicts from the Cold War, Middle East meddling (especially Iran-Iraq and US helping overthrow a democratic government and putting the shah in), Southeast Asia, Latin America and support for dictators and the arav royal family?

Again, what have you done for humanity, better than UN, or are you telling me that like the US, for every cent you give you make a Gasbandit base in someone's house, beat up some kids, help out that Arabic dictator bully stone women and sell guns to the neighborhood gangs?

How is USA's "let Israel and Palestine blow each other up" policy any better than a permanent UN base (or a UN-sanctioned US base)?

 

[JCM]

Oh, and just to top it off, lets also remember that US asked to lead he UN coalition in Korea during the time of communism fear-mongering, and that the USA's participation came with some very lucrative oil incentives from Kuwait and Saudi Arabia (not to mention the free Kuwait advertising campaign in the US paid by the Kuwaiti government itself)

 

[Tinwhistler]

Or go and study about Resolution 83 and United Nations Command, yes USA asked to lead, and they let USA lead, and guess who from other countries fought for UN in the Korean War?
Republic of Korea - 590,911
United States - 480,000
United Kingdom - 14,198
Canada - 6,146
Turkey - 5,453
Australia - 2,282
Philippines - 1,496
New Zealand - 1,385
Ethiopia - 1,271
Greece - 1,263
Thailand - 1,204
France - 1,119
Colombia - 1,068
Belgium - 900
South Africa - 826
The Netherlands - 819
Luxembourg - 11

not debating any points here (and in fact, i haven't even read the arguments. I clicked this link by mistake), but this list looked a little off without the US troop count. The Republic of Korea and the US supplied 96.4%, and the US supplied 43% of the troops for that war according to these numbers. The rest of the world supplied 3.6%.

 

[Singularity.EXE]

I always enjoy these threads with JCM because they are so gosh-darned educational.

 

[GasBandit]

As I said, Fox news will slam Sudan, Rwanda and Timor, and the viewers forget that UN has had over 200 missions, with high profile successes in all-out wars like Suez Canal conflict, Hindo-Pakistani conflict, the Six Day war, Korea and Gulf War I, and even in the case of Rwanda, much more bloodshed would've happened without UN there. Most African missions were successful, democracies allowed to be established, and even in the unsuccessful one much bloodshed was avoided and refugees were helped, and police forces were trained, and overall in the world outside Africa and Timor, UN has had a pretty good track record of maintaining peace

Hark, *snip useless comparison*

Gas, what happened to you, are you running away from your own point?And using Bush, with the doubled terrorist actvity after Sept 11, as an example?

You cited success on UN Peacekeeping by quoting them keeping peace in quite a number of places, many about as dangerous as the half foot of space under my bed. That's what the comparison to bush's defense vs terrorism was about. Cypress? Come ON man. Not only that, but you also put such lovely successes as BOSNIA, AFGHANISTAN, and other things that flew apart badly?

Or how about forging peace in the Suez canal, which allowed commerce to bloom for half a century?

Right when the UN was barely formed and people still thought it had some actual power, you mean?

[quote:34h1meaf]And hang on just a sec there professor... are you giving the UN credit for Korea and Gulf War 1?

Let me guess, Fox tells you that US went alone on a horse with a six-shooter, and there weren't many others that died for that peace?
[/quote:34h1meaf]

FAUX NEWS! *click* FAUX NEWS! *click* FAUX NEWS! *click* WHAARGARBL!

Go study about Resolution 678, and the coalition from 34 countries: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Kuwait, Morocco, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Spain, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and USA, being an ally of Kuwait, allowed to lead.

Go study the numbers of troops and materiel provided by each of those lovely coalition members, and ask yourself which one was the one that it was absolutely most crucial to the effort. That wasn't the UN, that was America with the UN coming in on the coattails.

Or go and study about Resolution 83 and United Nations Command, yes USA asked to lead, and they let USA lead, and guess who from other countries fought for UN in the Korean War?

I love how you left the US out of that list of yours... with their 480,000 troops.

Republic of Korea - 590,911

Well, it would have been kind of silly for the Koreans to sit their own war out, now wouldn't it have?

United Kingdom - 14,198
Canada - 6,146
Turkey - 5,453
Australia - 2,282
Philippines - 1,496
New Zealand - 1,385
Ethiopia - 1,271
Greece - 1,263
Thailand - 1,204
France - 1,119
Colombia - 1,068
Belgium - 900
South Africa - 826
The Netherlands - 819
Luxembourg - 11

And how fortunate we were to have those token 11 Luxembourgains... they really turned the tide. Seriouly, all those together add up to 39,411. Less than 10% of the US commitment to the fight. It's a nice show of solidarity and all, but that's all it was... for show.

USA was also allowed to establish permanent UN-sanctioned bases under different resolutions in both Kuwait and Korea. A good solution for Israel/Palestine.

AHA! Nice try to subtly change what you were advocating! Permanent AMERICAN bases SANCTIONED by the UN now, not just American support! How is that different? It's just slapping a UN bumper sticker on American tanks and letting them go from proxy war support mode to direct conflict on the ground... but then I guess that's pretty much what the UN always does when something is a success for them, isn't it?

[quote:34h1meaf]So again Gasbandit,I say on UN's track record, its not perfect, but it will have a better success than the current USA policy, and again, Gas, what have you done for humanity?

Avoids answering[/quote:34h1meaf] I didn't avoid answering, you asked an irrelevant question and I tried to answer the only way I could think of it having any relevancy at all. What I, Gas Bandit "have done for humanity" is completely disconnected from this discussion. Answer ME how this question has any bearing. If you come back and you say "I meant what has the US done," I did answer that and even provided links.

[quote:34h1meaf]The choices are not "Put the UN in charge or buy Gas Bandit a plane ticket to Tel Aviv." Unless by "you" you mean the United States, in which case the question is laughable seeing as how we're the most charitable, most foreign-aid giving nation on the planet.

May I compare that with your military spending,[/quote:34h1meaf]Which is again, an irrelevant comparison. Or even worse, damaging to your own position since it has been shown that american military spending has been what has given the UN what you claim to be its greatest successes.

And body count from conflicts from the Cold War, Middle East meddling (especially Iran-Iraq and US helping overthrow a democratic government and putting the shah in), Southeast Asia, Latin America and support for dictators and the arav royal family?

Ok, you got us. We're evil. I guess that means we should just stop donating more to charity than the rest of the world combined, and stop giving more than twice the amount in foreign aid than any other country... and get back to cackling as we wring our hands, set up puppet dictators and siphon oil from dead babies.

How is USA's "let Israel and Palestine blow each other up" policy any better than a permanent UN base (or a UN-sanctioned US base)?

See, here you're pulling a double whammy. You're backpedalling again from "a permanent UN presence" to a "permanent UN-sanctioned U.S. Base" which is a different matter entirely. Not only that, but you're mischaracterizing US policy. It's not "let Israel and Palestine blow each other up," it's "let Israel defend itself as it sees fit, with the support of the United States." But then the entire (largely antisemitic) world screams "overreaction" and the US has to go put its arm around Israel's shoulder and say "Look buddy, I know this is a big load of bullshit and that you're only defending yourself, but just so everybody will shut up and we can all get along, can you just turn the other cheek on this for once?" It's happened over and over again... and I guess both the US and Israel are sick of it.

If the arab world was REALLY concerned with the plight of the palestinian refugees, they would have absorbed them instead of basically forcefully rejecting them just so they'd have a neverending excuse to hate Israel, at the expense of palestinian lives and poverty.

 

[GasBandit]

Oh, and let's just go ahead and get this little gem out of the way too, because I know somebody's going to end up posting it and trying to look oh so witty while doing it.

 

[Mr_Chaz]

But then the entire (largely antisemitic) world screams "overreaction"

Wow. Just...just...wow.

 

[GasBandit]

But then the entire (largely antisemitic) world screams "overreaction"

Wow. Just...just...wow.

Back in the day, the Jews were pretty much hated by everybody in Europe. It wasn't just Hitler. Even the Pope and half of the Protestants hated them. So, that's pretty much an overwhelming majority. They fled to America for a reason, you know.

Since mass genocide is morally unacceptable, the Europeans took this opportunity to get rid of an eyesore. Just pool the Jews in some place away from Europe and leave them alone. Palestine was an obvious choice. The Americans wanted Jewish support. The Europeans wanted Jews to go away. They both had something to gain from the UN resolution.

Most of the world still doesn't particularly care for em, not that they'll say it out loud. And a great big portion of the UN is also tinhorn dictators in funny hats, doing their best to drag down the US in whatever way it can.

 

[JCM]

You just found an image explaining your entire post.

I mention Bosnia, several civil wars and several African countries with ethnic genocide, and as usual, Gasbandit takes the weakest one, Greece, and focuses on that.

More americans!!

Yes, as I noted above, the Korean war was during USA's "kill all communist" phase, remember Myanmar, Vietnam and Afghanistan? They are still fucked from the effects of USA's anti-communist stance.

Gulf War? Again, I already noted, USA was asked by,and got some very lucrative rewards fro Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Got anything else, or are you going to babble about Cyrus out of 200 conflicts, where 2 thousand UN troopers died, not because of oil or installing petty dictators, or are you going to tell us how is a UN base, or a UN-sanctioned American base, in any way a bad strategy?

Because in the end, UN did more good, and has stopped a few civil wars, aided with much humanitarian aid, managed a few treaties and stopped a few wars and although its not powerful as people think, has managed to save more lives than the typical republican worms will ever save.