May 20, 2013 | Full List of 171 Documented Israeli Cease Fire Violations – Updated

reply to post by GakunGak

Dear GakunGak,

Perhaps I'm being overly sensitive, but I have two major problems with UN resolutions, especially from the general council.

1) Membership in the UN is restricted to Sovereign nations. Meaning nations that can't be ordered around, they have to agree to something for it to have effect. Therefore, the UN can only offer opinions or suggestions directly to concerned nations. Sure they can arrange for other nations to get together to punish a member they don't like, but it doesn't take the UN for that.

2) As far as Middle East resolutions go, it's basically a case of tiny little nations no one has ever heard of, and countries that hate the US and Israel, getting together to say Israel is bad. In a sense, they're just playing to the cameras. Sure, it makes for good articles about how Israel is terrible because the world says so, but I don't think Israel cares. After all, they've been surrounded by enemies for a long time and have gotten used to it.

You know, It's been a while since I've seen anyone make a case for the continued existence of the UN. I wonder if it would make sense to scrap it and start a new League of Free Nations. It would be based on a government's committment to open elections, a vigorous press, certain personal and religious freedoms, etc. That might be worthwhile.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952



With point 1 I fully agree. That's what I basically wrote a while ago, it has an "advisory/recommendation" effect. While not obligatory, but it sure helps to consider it.

As with point 2, there I disagree. Anyone watching the news, doing traveling in that direction or just pure educational knowledge knows or have heard of those nations, who, with respect, I do not consider tiny. Saying Israel is bad without any proof or evidence would be a horrible thing to do, but those "tiny" nations simply do not have the lobbying influence, msm presentation or Internet Defense Force [forum warriors] capabilities that Israel has with US support. Catch my drift? You can sway public opinion with a well put presentation with a healthy dose of emotions in it. And what happens when the other side speak out?

I also share the "scrap the UN" feeling because it is not that powerful in expressing it's opinion. A much simpler, but more effective alternative should be put together by all. And that veto thing going on, replace it with
50% +"veto members" votes. Because all it takes is one member to bring down anything worth voting for....

reply to post by GakunGak

Dear GakunGak,

A pleasure to hear from you.

. . . it has an "advisory/recommendation" effect. While not obligatory, but it sure helps to consider it.

Agreed. Unfortunately it is too often used as a propaganda tool rather than an advisory opinion.

As with point 2, there I disagree.

The way you have interpreted it, I agree with your disagreement. (Wait, let me think about that, yeah, Ok.) What I meant by tiny nations included: Nauru, Tuvalu, Palau, San Marino, Monaco, Lichtenstein, Saint Kitts and Nevis. That's seven UN votes for a total population of just a hair under 200,000 people. That's not even an impressive city, let alone seven countries.

The Middle Eastern countries have enough money and support to put on a presentation just as impressive as Israel's. Besides, Israel has the added handicap of Netanyahu. (Remember his red line on a bomb? )

I also share the "scrap the UN" feeling because it is not that powerful in expressing it's opinion. A much simpler, but more effective alternative should be put together by all. And that veto thing going on, replace it with
50% +"veto members" votes. Because all it takes is one member to bring down anything worth voting for....

Here, finally, is where we have to do more work to find agreement. I don't think the UN's problem is that it's too weak. I have no interest in our country belonging to a group that can issue orders by a vote of the rest of the world. I don't want to replace sovereign nations with an all-powerful world government.

My belief is that the problem is that the members do not have common fundamental principles. Membership in the United States requires acquiesence to the Constitution and various principles. In the UN, people opposed to freedom sit across from those who support it. There is nothing that they agree on even before problems come up.

That's why I was thinking of a League of Free Nations which at least has freedom as a unifying principle. Other countries can found their own councils. Muslims would object if Presbyterians told them what had to be in their teachings. They have no authority to tell Muslims what to teach. Likewise, China, North Korea, and dozens of other countries have no business telling free countries what they should teach about Religious freedom and blasphemy.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Dear charles1952,
Likewise.

I understand your point, I really do. But again, even those tiny [smaller than a large city, me included] should still be able to represent themselves or have a big daddy that represents their interests. Because, you know, equality and all that. But whatever we wish for, it is what it is.... and we can't change it, unless we pelt eggs at the UN building and demand "Change".
Yep, Big Oil's like Saudi do have the money. But it's their fault and inability to present their cause the way people would understand, CNN/Fox flash and colors quality. Still doesn't change the facts on the ground though....

Your elaboration about the League of Free Nations do sound extremely interesting and has massive potential if done the right way. But wishful thinking is one thing, reality is totally another.
And I agree on preserving sovereignty of all nations, keeping their currency, culture, history and stuff like that.


Star from me

reply to post by GakunGak

Dear GakunGak,

Thank you for one of the most rare and wonderful experiences I have on ATS. On those few occasions when I find that someone, who seems at first to be very difficult to talk to, is willing to go for a walk and find understanding and agreement through conversation, I do a huge happy dance. It lifts my heart for the rest of the day. Thank you, thank you.

But again, even those tiny [smaller than a large city, me included] should still be able to represent themselves or have a big daddy that represents their interests.

And again, more agreement. No problem at all. I think the small nations have an entirely different set of concerns from the big ones, and those concerns should not be ignored. I don't know if you've ever read any of the Mouse series (The Mouse that Roared, The Mouse on the Moon, etc.), but they describe a tiny nation that, in one book, invades and defeats the United States with two hundred men in armor with crossbows. They form a League of Little Nations.

But, as you say, realism pokes it's ugly snout into matters, and for now, they'll have to be content with forming political aliances and making speeches.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


Dear charles1952,
The feeling's mutual.

For me, the point of being in a forum/discussion group is to have a conversation, giving out your opinion on a matter while also respecting the opinion of others. No one has to agree on everything or something, but at least you learn something every day.
The book you describe sounds interesting, I will check it out when I go to a vacation from work.
I'm more of a Tom Clancy guy, cold war, espionage and all that

Palestinians say Israelis poison medication used by Gazan patients

Palestinian sources say Israel has supplied Gaza hospitals with a potentially killer gas to be used for anesthetic purposes. Four patients have died after inhaling carbon dioxide instead of nitrous dioxide during surgical operations.


No suprise the Jewish Bayer corperation:

Bayer Sells AIDS-Infected Drug Banned in U.S. in Europe, Asia - Unearthed documents show that the drug company Bayer sold millions of dollars worth of an injectable blood-clotting medicine -- Factor VIII concentrate, intended for hemophiliacs -- to Asian, Latin American, and some European countries in the mid-1980s, although they knew that it was tainted with AIDS. Bayer knew about the fact that the drug was tainted and told the FDA to keep things under wraps while they made a profit off of a drug that infected its patients. If these allegations are true, then both Bayer and the FDA are at fault for this catastrophe. FDA regulators helped to keep the continued sales hidden, asking the company that the problem be ''quietly solved without alerting the Congress, the medical community and the public,'' according to the minutes of a 1985 meeting

I guess I'm not surprised anymore....

reply to post by GakunGak

Dear GakunGak,

Sorry I took so long, but I don't know how to respond to this. The Carbon Dioxide thing might have happened that way, it's hard to know. I suppose there might have been a mixup with the gas cylinders. I don't know. It seems a pretty feeble thing to do. I hate death, but four vicitims already in hospital? That seems like a pretty doubtful target. I'm not denying it, it just seems strange. Again, I don't know.

What, to look at a broader picture, do you think Israel has to do to get the attacks stopped, and recognition of the UN declaration that they are a State?

With respect,
Charles1952