US calls for immediate ceasefire in Gaza with draft UN resolution : worldnews

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

"It said an “immediate and sustained ceasefire” was “imperative” adding that “towards that end” unequivocal support should be given to the hostage negotiations."

Read the danged article folks, it's just saying "a ceasefire would be good, they need to agree to our hostage deal to do that." They're not calling for a ceasefire unequivocally, it's a continuation of the Biden position from a new venue in the hope that it will, aesthetically, look like they're doing something.

At least until we see the resolution we should be careful about just granting Joe credit foe this.

Edit: That is the resolution, it's literally just the Biden-Israel line of "agree to our deal and we'll stop for 6 weeks" which they are peddling as if that amounts to a durable ceasefire.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Fucking finally. Enough people got Biden scared enough to make a serious move. It's horrifying that it took this long, with countless lives lost, for it to happen.

I hope this will meaningfully improve the situation, and not serve as a slap on Israel's wrist. Permenent peace is a necessity, but I'll take a ceasefire at all any day of the week.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 7 months ago

Pretty wild how the nation that vetoed calls for a ceasefire calls for a ceasefire, but I'll take it.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago

repeatedly vetoes every UN resolution against Israel

drafts resolution for Ceasfire on US (and Israel) terms against Gaza

???

"progress" and profit

[–] [email protected] 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

UN released an analysis of satellite imagery showing that 35% of buildings in Gaza had been damaged or destroyed during Israel’s offensive, which has claimed almost 32,000 Palestinian lives.

I am speechless, in what world this is justifiable. Just for perspective, before the war only 30K of the Palestinians were believed to have links to Hamas. That's less than 1.5% of the population of Gaza.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago

Apartheid Israel has killed more than 1% of Palestinians in Gaza (70% are women and children) in 4 months. This is equivalent to killing 3 million Americans in 4 months. The death toll is now past the Bosnian Genocide. More needs to be done than just a ceasefire; they need to be sanctioned like Russia and other pariah states are.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

I'm so glad to hear this. I wish it were issued a long time ago, but anyway.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

This is a step, but i didn't see any timeframe mentioned in the article and definitely didn't see the word i was looking for, permanent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Say what?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Took the genocidal shitbags long enough. They get no credit for doing it now; especially bc it's obvious they're only doing it to salvage Democrat chances at the polls.

[–] [email protected] 96 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The uncommitted votes are having an effect! All of the little worms telling me that pressuring Biden was pointless and I should just support him to stop Trump can eat my ass. This is a result of the public pressure his administration is facing. Our voices matter.

This isn't good enough. We need an unconditional ceasefire to then negotiate on hostages, but this is another step in the right direction.

We did that.

[+] [email protected] -12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

How do you know that? Your making an assumption by inference

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The Biden campaign is openly troubled by the uncommitted vote campaign, so this seems like the obvious next step. Is there an alternative explanation? Why reverse course now? What else changed?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Just saying there is no direct evidence and folks shouldn't pat themselves on the back. Edit calling people "little worms" when you have no proof your position is valid is a touch presumptive.

I've not seen a press release indicating the connection of events, so it's an assumption.

That's true regardless of the popularity of this fact on this board.

That said I am happy to see some sort of progress on the issue.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

He'll never admit it, but it's a deduction based on the open evidence of the Biden campaign recognizing the uncommitted Problem and based on there not being alternative explanations (or at least, any good or consistent ones)

I don't think we should celebrate yet, but this is encouraging and that matters. It's encouraging to see that public pressure seemingly matters.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Mmk so still an assumption based on your view of voter's power on the system. Everything you are hinging this on is based on your perception of the situation.

I stepped on a crack on the sidewalk yesterday, then my friend called me.

Obviously the crack caused them to think of me.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

The entire concept behind representative democracy is that voters influence their representatives. What I'm getting from you is that you don't actually believe that America is a democracy or that representatives actually represent voters.

I guess I don't totally disagree. I just think that even if Biden might not be worried about electability, he must be worried about his regime's legitimacy. The last thing he wants is a repeat of the BLM uprisings.

Still not hearing an alternative explaination from you btw

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Don't be obtuse. Its not clever.

If you're absolutely insistent on defending your comment, start by telling us all how the opposite assumption, that Biden is completely unaffected by voter opinion in an election year makes more sense.

Please take this seriously. I am really, really tired of snarky quips.

[+] [email protected] -10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Lol if you're tired of public discourse, perhaps take a break. I'm not responsible for your day. Edit I am not attempting clever, so don't put that incivility on me either.

Second, I agree that the premise is a good one. Use votes (or lack thereof) to influence behavior even in primaries. Edit it is good voter behavior to do so, in general.

But ultimately, before there is a statement or discussion from the Whitehouse we have zero evidence that they cared about the primary votes at all and didn't have some other variable come to the surface that finally forced some progress.

You are asking me to prove something happened for which there is no evidence, and I am expressing skepticism that an action had the reaction you propose. I can't prove something exists or doesn't and neither can you.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm not tired of discourse, as i explicitly stated i am tired of snark. Too many people think one is the same as the other. For answering me without a tired one-liner, i honestly and unsarcastically thank you.

Let's discuss! I had a problem with your statement earlier, (not you) because your are asking op to provide what you yourself cannot, as you yourself said here. You also provided nothing to move the conversation forward, such as another plausible reason for Biden pivoting here.

You are asking me to prove something happened for which there is no evidence, and I am expressing skepticism...

Skepticism is fine. But there is no evidence is there? And none against it.

Since that is the case, we must move towards probable causes for this change, yes?

We could discuss possible other reasons, you could show me quotes or something to say this administration has been moving in this direction. If we have nothing, we could then move into conjecture. That would be fun! That would be discourse! I am down.

What i am telling you is what you put the first time doesn't cut it by any metric. You don't get to ask for something you cannot provide, in a comment that is not claiming anything other than "pressure changes policy"

Yes, that is what it said. Perhaps you took it to mean something else, and we can talk about that! That too would be discourse.

So let's have some

[–] [email protected] -5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"probable" is a value judgement by you. If you have data that non-voting in past primaries has definitively driven policy change then we can talk probability, but I've never seen such a metric described.

I am ready to be educated on the historical record of this dynamic, then we can reasonably discuss this current event.

Otherwise guessing something happened as a result of non-voting is just speculation.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Hmm. Perhaps this is a misunderstanding after all. this is about a recent primary election where voters chose non-committed, not abstention from voting entirely

[–] [email protected] 35 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Please keep going. The US needs to turn on the Netanyahu government. If the west has any principles it needs to show that nobody is exempt from justice. Not even a "strong ally" who's people have suffered from historical horrors.

They need to be tried for war crimes.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I know you didn't mean bad by it, but talking about justice like that? I know we don't live in times of Hannibal and an eye for an eye isn't productive or progressive at all, but Israel, and not just the current scpagoat Bibi the Genocider, has decades of oppression and genocide they have to pay for.

To even think about justice, Israel needs to:

Go back on all the land it invaded and occupies during the current conflict.
Give back all the land its "settlers" has stolen through gunpoint.
Give back all the land it has taken through direct military invasion.
Pay reparation to the next of kin (to those families it didn't wipe out completely).
Pay for all the public amenities and residential structures it has wiped out over and over, basically rebuilding the country, with the interest accumulated through repeated stifling of the Palestinian country.
Demilitarized for some decades like the post WWII Germany was justly subjected to.
Cede to a UN mandate for its defense so it will be kept in check while also being protected.

I don't know why the Jewish people need an ethno-state as if this is the 19th century, but this would be the starters for a justice without uprooting the whole people from the place they have been living in with the land given to them by British lordship and the UN mandate, both of whom have turned a blind eye to genocide, warcrimes and invasions Israel has inflicted in the Middle-East for decades.

Going back to main topic, I don't think Biden will do or say anything about the current landgrab and damage Israel has caused. He'll just play to the downfall of the current scapegoat of the Zionist endeavour, after he has been a good boy for it, and shut the matter until another scapegoat and and excuse for more genocide and landgrab is prepared for the next decade.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

All I'm asking for is for the air of invulnerability around so many to be pierced. I know this goes back a long way. I know Netanyahu and co are only the current perpetrators. I know it goes from the person at the top right down to the person "just following orders". All of it continues while there's no consequences, and there will never be consequences until nations change their stances towards todays situation.

We can't change yesterday. We can only learn from it. Only tomorrow can be made better, and IMHO it needs leaders to understand they are not above the law. Unfortunately the idea behind Magna Carta seems to have expired.

World News

Rules: