5 ms·

UN seeks ICJ opinion on Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine

18 points by jacooper 4y ago

colechristensen 4y ago
Ok, a court with zero enforcement power might rule on a territorial dispute, so? The only resolution is going to come from the disputing parties agreeing or someone with a terrible amount of power going to war. Neither is going to happen any time soon and other feeble actions don’t help.
josephcsible 4y ago
In any UN vote where Canada, the US, and the UK all vote one way, and Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia all vote the other way, I know which side I support.
- hackrnusr 4y ago
  After US invasion of Iraq, I couldn't agree more.
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    I meant I'd support the former group of countries, but it sounds like you're saying that that made you distrust the US to the point that you'd support the latter group. Is that correct? If so, does that mean that you oppose, e.g., this resolution about Ukraine? https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3994052?ln=en https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3994052?ln=en
    - hackrnusr 4y ago
      In other news: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-707694 https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-707694 https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/19/are-palestinians-pro-russia https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/19/are-palestinia... https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/2022-04-05/ty-article/.highlight/zelenskyy-says-post-war-ukraine-will-emulate-israel-wont-be-liberal-european/00000180-5bc4-d718-afd9-dffcdfdd0000 https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/2022-04-05/ty-arti... Obviously, any reasonable person supports Ukrainians who are being killed and pushed out of their homes because of this senseless war. Far more interesting question though is the geopolitical one about who exactly caused this war ... and for what purpose.
      - davidf18 4y ago
        [dead]
- demarq 4y ago
  It sounds like you are taking a stance based on countries you like. Do you think it is unwise to blindly take a stance because someone else takes a stance? I mean it’s like following someone’s opinion without critical thinking right? What is your opinion on sovereignty and occupation by force? How does that work with Russia and Ukraine and do you see any parallels with Israel and Palestine?
  - josephcsible 4y ago
    I think that once you put enough countries on both sides of your line, https://xkcd.com/1170/ https://xkcd.com/1170/ starts to apply. Do you really think that all of the countries with basically good governments will vote for the wrong side of a resolution and all of the countries with evil governments will vote for the right side of the same resolution?
    - jacooper 4y ago
      Yes. Because these governments created and still support the apartheid occupation.
    - demarq 4y ago
      > I think that once you put enough countries on both sides of your line... The votes were 24Yes 84No and 54abstaining. In other words the US was in the minority. The article unfortunately picks only russia and china as examples of the countries that voted no. Here are some of the other countries that vote no, do you see them as evil? - Portugal - Ireland - Belgium - Maldives - Luxemburg - Barbados What about US allies that abstained? are they good or evil now? - France - Brazil - Denmark - Finland - Japan - the Netherlands - Sweden - Switzerland There are no governments so "basically good" as to be good all the time, and no governments so "evil" as to be evil all the time. We can just make up ideas of good and evil to simplify things so we don't have to think. That's what successful propaganda looks like.
      - josephcsible 4y ago
        > Here are some of the other countries that vote no, do you see them as evil? No. That's the converse of what I said.
aliyfarah 4y ago
I'm not sure whats more incredible, that the US once again votes against any resolution seeking accountability for Israel's brutal occupation of the Palestinian territories or the Western media's mute response to it, especially in light of the current conflict in Europe. What reasonable justification could there possible be to vote against the ICJ to produce an opinion? Yet the US is currently seeking to take Russia to the ICJ for its actions in Ukraine. The US & Western governments have absolutely zero moral standing at all to criticise Russia's illegal annexations of Ukrainian territories when they themselves turn a blind eye to their allies annexation of another neighbours territory (Golan Heights, Syria). Despite there being an existing UN resolution (497) rejecting the annexation, the US under Trump has formally recognised Golan Heights as US territory in 2017! [1]. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_the_Golan_Heights_as_part_of_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_t...
- schoolornot 4y ago
  Wars have consequences. Syria didn't need to wage war and attack Israel from the Golan Heights. What reason is there to go back to pre-67 borders?
  - aliyfarah 4y ago
    If I understand you correctly, you’re saying if a country is attacked by another nation state, they’re entitled to seize the territories that was used to launch the attack if they win the war, like some kind of war loot?
    - polski-g 4y ago
      Uh, yes? That's obvious. If Russia loses is expect Ukraine to get some loot in return.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

18 points by jacooper 4y ago

Ok, a court with zero enforcement power might rule on a territorial dispute, so? The only resolution is going to come from the disputing parties agreeing or someone with a terrible amount of power going to war. Neither is going to happen any time soon and other feeble actions don’t help.

josephcsible 4y ago

In any UN vote where Canada, the US, and the UK all vote one way, and Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia all vote the other way, I know which side I support.

hackrnusr 4y ago
After US invasion of Iraq, I couldn't agree more.
- josephcsible 4y ago
  I meant I'd support the former group of countries, but it sounds like you're saying that that made you distrust the US to the point that you'd support the latter group. Is that correct? If so, does that mean that you oppose, e.g., this resolution about Ukraine? https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3994052?ln=en https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3994052?ln=en
  - hackrnusr 4y ago
    In other news: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-707694 https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-707694 https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/19/are-palestinians-pro-russia https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/19/are-palestinia... https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/2022-04-05/ty-article/.highlight/zelenskyy-says-post-war-ukraine-will-emulate-israel-wont-be-liberal-european/00000180-5bc4-d718-afd9-dffcdfdd0000 https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/2022-04-05/ty-arti... Obviously, any reasonable person supports Ukrainians who are being killed and pushed out of their homes because of this senseless war. Far more interesting question though is the geopolitical one about who exactly caused this war ... and for what purpose.
    - davidf18 4y ago
      [dead]
demarq 4y ago
It sounds like you are taking a stance based on countries you like. Do you think it is unwise to blindly take a stance because someone else takes a stance? I mean it’s like following someone’s opinion without critical thinking right? What is your opinion on sovereignty and occupation by force? How does that work with Russia and Ukraine and do you see any parallels with Israel and Palestine?
- josephcsible 4y ago
  I think that once you put enough countries on both sides of your line, https://xkcd.com/1170/ https://xkcd.com/1170/ starts to apply. Do you really think that all of the countries with basically good governments will vote for the wrong side of a resolution and all of the countries with evil governments will vote for the right side of the same resolution?
  - jacooper 4y ago
    Yes. Because these governments created and still support the apartheid occupation.
  - demarq 4y ago
    > I think that once you put enough countries on both sides of your line... The votes were 24Yes 84No and 54abstaining. In other words the US was in the minority. The article unfortunately picks only russia and china as examples of the countries that voted no. Here are some of the other countries that vote no, do you see them as evil? - Portugal - Ireland - Belgium - Maldives - Luxemburg - Barbados What about US allies that abstained? are they good or evil now? - France - Brazil - Denmark - Finland - Japan - the Netherlands - Sweden - Switzerland There are no governments so "basically good" as to be good all the time, and no governments so "evil" as to be evil all the time. We can just make up ideas of good and evil to simplify things so we don't have to think. That's what successful propaganda looks like.
    - josephcsible 4y ago
      > Here are some of the other countries that vote no, do you see them as evil? No. That's the converse of what I said.

aliyfarah 4y ago

I'm not sure whats more incredible, that the US once again votes against any resolution seeking accountability for Israel's brutal occupation of the Palestinian territories or the Western media's mute response to it, especially in light of the current conflict in Europe. What reasonable justification could there possible be to vote against the ICJ to produce an opinion? Yet the US is currently seeking to take Russia to the ICJ for its actions in Ukraine. The US & Western governments have absolutely zero moral standing at all to criticise Russia's illegal annexations of Ukrainian territories when they themselves turn a blind eye to their allies annexation of another neighbours territory (Golan Heights, Syria). Despite there being an existing UN resolution (497) rejecting the annexation, the US under Trump has formally recognised Golan Heights as US territory in 2017! [1]. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_the_Golan_Heights_as_part_of_Israel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_recognition_of_t...

schoolornot 4y ago
Wars have consequences. Syria didn't need to wage war and attack Israel from the Golan Heights. What reason is there to go back to pre-67 borders?
- aliyfarah 4y ago
  If I understand you correctly, you’re saying if a country is attacked by another nation state, they’re entitled to seize the territories that was used to launch the attack if they win the war, like some kind of war loot?
  - polski-g 4y ago
    Uh, yes? That's obvious. If Russia loses is expect Ukraine to get some loot in return.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]