this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

World News

34956 readers
466 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Calls are growing for the UN Security Council to be reformed after the US became the only member to use its veto power to block a Gaza ceasefire resolution, a move welcomed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The UN chief says he will keep pushing for peace.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Which will be vetoed by all permanent members of the security council.

[–] spiderkle@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Nobody is surprised and that's a bad sign. The UN was invented to give the nations of our world a shared forum to talk things out and find a "resolution" before genociding each other. The thing is we can't expect the UN to stop conflict.

Edit: Some people seem to confuse the UN security council with the UN. The SC has only 15 members (5 permanent member nations, 10 rotating member nations) and is usually asked to vote on intervention once a resolution was passed. It can't act with a veto.

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah, this is something people don't quite understand. The UN primarily provides platform to initiate diplomatic discourse.

Even when there is demand to reform the UN to give it more power, most people will object because "'muh sovereignty".

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

The problem in this case is depending on the security council to act on an issue it isn't designed to address.

The main purpose of the UN is to prevent global war, and the Security Council is the primary way in which that goal is achieved.

In that context, the P5's veto power makes sense. It prevents resolutions pitting the world against one of the superpowers that can sustain that kind of war.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We could save so much money if we just disbanded the UN.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Th UN gives all countries the ability to have a voice on the world stage, yeah the security council can suck sometimes but not having the UN would be so much worse than having it

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If only we had some global communication system that allowed people to post their opinions. Maybe a packet based one.

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

We already had world leaders tweeting their opinions at other, but they still meet in person to discuss issues and form agreements.

A structured system is necessary when you have meetings with representatives for nearly every person on the planet

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

And again how is that working?

[–] otter@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Instead of replying with that same comment again, why don't you explain what alternative you have in mind. Don't just vaguely mention 'packets'

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh I am sorry I wasn't aware that I had to come up with a solution if I point out the current solution isn't working. Shit. Better say nothing ever again and just keep giving my money to a corrupt institution that fucks up everything it touches. Sorry for pointing out the emperor has no clothing here is free fucking money

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

An imperfect system doesn't mean we need to throw out the whole system. And if we did throw it out, you can't just not have a replacement for it.

People making posts on the Internet is not equivalent to real people meeting and being forced to at least give an answer.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Forced to give an answer like when they abstain?

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

That's still an answer. We actively know they chose to abstain rather than passively. Still better than radio silence from "the Internet"

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Last I heard we haven't descended into nuclear war in the last 75 years.

Or having gone into another World War.

Are you familiar with the failure of the League of Nations? I'd look into it if you're not.

[–] kurwa@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

Could you not say thats because of MAD from nuclear weapons?