Jump to content
270soft Forum
Conservative Elector 2

Your vote in the U.N. resolution

How would you have voted in the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 (The situation in the Middle East) ?  

21 members have voted

  1. 1. How would you have voted in the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 (The situation in the Middle East) ?

    • For
      9
    • Against
      11
    • Abstained
      2


Recommended Posts

What is your stance in the recent UN resolution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Against

I can't change the option to make votes public... Sorry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For it. 

Despite a Jew(from the reform branch), I agree with the UN on this vote. Israel has already forced Palestinians to live within the West Bank, and building settlements for Jews only insure the Palestinians are squeezed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Against, the one-state solution is the only moral way to go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Palestinians as an overall group cannot vote for the national Knesset elections, yet are asked to change their lives because of how the Knesset voted. If the west bank is Israeli land, then they- Palestinians- should be able to vote. This current government under Bibi is anything but moral in its treatment towards the Palestinians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "Palestinians" are not a real ethnic group, they were operatives of the Muslim States that deny the truth of the true Jewish state that belongs in that land, there has never been a true ethnic muslim state in that land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Palestinians are an ethnic group tho. Plus, the Ottoman empire- which called itself the Caliphate- ruled over the land. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be realistic.  The land can never be shared, and Israel will not be destroyed anytime soon.

In regards to raw American interests, Israel is an oasis of stability and freedom in the Middle East.  America has tried so hard, especially under the Obama administration, to appease and support the Arab nations, but that has only been met by more economic and social despair.  Anybody remember Obama's big 2009 speech in Cairo?  Trillions of dollars sunk in Afghanistan and Iraq for?  Removing Gaddafi in Libya led to... ISIS entering there?  Seriously, women can't even drive in Saudi Arabia and children are getting bombed in Syria.

Yet, we continue to spend so much time on yelling at Israel?  :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm for it, since it appears the grand majority of the world is for it. I don't think any country's will should be imposed on a majority, whether at the local or global level. If most of the world was against the Resolution, I'd be against it. I believe in Democracy at home and abroad, including internationally. I don't believe in vetoing UN resolutions that have a clear majority. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Sunnymentoaddict said:

The Palestinians are an ethnic group tho. Plus, the Ottoman empire- which called itself the Caliphate- ruled over the land. 

But the Ottomans were an Empire that conquered, they never ethnically owned it rightfully. And the "Palestinians" are nothing but a ploy by the muslims to try to eradicate the Jews, they have been doing since the last century when the leader of this terrorist sect convinced Hitler that the Jews were evil and started the Holocaust, this has always been a Jewish state ever since God chose the Israelites to own it as their promised land and it always will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, vcczar said:

I'm for it, since it appears the grand majority of the world is for it. I don't think any country's will should be imposed on a majority, whether at the local or global level. If most of the world was against the Resolution, I'd be against it. I believe in Democracy at home and abroad, including internationally. I don't believe in vetoing UN resolutions that have a clear majority. 

Then what is the point of a veto? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jayavarman said:

Then what is the point of a veto? :P

I wouldn't use the veto unless it barely passed, and it was clearly a bad idea. But overall, I would almost never veto. I actually don't like the idea of only certain countries having a veto. I'd pass a resolution to remove the veto. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jayavarman said:

The Ottoman... Turks? :P

PREACH!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

But the Ottomans were an Empire that conquered, they never ethnically owned it rightfully. And the "Palestinians" are nothing but a ploy by the muslims to try to eradicate the Jews, they have been doing since the last century when the leader of this terrorist sect convinced Hitler that the Jews were evil and started the Holocaust, this has always been a Jewish state ever since God chose the Israelites to own it as their promised land and it always will be.

The Americans were a "conquering empire that never ethically owned the land" from the perspective of the aboriginal peoples that lived on the land they now govern for millennia previous to the Columbian era. Plus, when you say "And the "Palestinians" are nothing but a ploy by the muslims to try to eradicate the Jews," you speak of the "muslims(sic)" as though they were a single, unified bloc in lockstep with one single leadership, plan, and conspiracy. While I know that's a growing misconception - nay, myth, amongst, many Americans and others in the Western World, it's the farthest thing from the truth, but many just as uneducated on the matter youth in predominantly Islamic countries are being taught a similar myth of faceless, impersonal, impacable unity and lack of individuality about the entire Judeo-Christian World. Both myths are just as false, but such ignorance leads to unnecessary death and destruction and an unwarranted feeling of justification in it. "Know your enemy, and your battle is half won." - Sun Tzu. He'd probably say we've slid back on knowing our enemy - and who our enemies actually are - to being halfway again from our starting point away from victory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

The Americans were a "conquering empire that never ethically owned the land" from the perspective of the aboriginal peoples that lived on the land they now govern for millennia previous to the Columbian era. Plus, when you say And the "Palestinians" are nothing but a ploy by the muslims to try to eradicate the Jews," you speak of the "muslims(sic)" as though they were a single, unified bloc in lockstep with one single leadership, plan, and conspiracy. While I know that's a growing misconception - nay, myth, amongst, many Americans and others in the Western World, it's the farthest thing from the truth, but many just as uneducated on the matter youth in predominantly Islamic countries are being taught a similar myth of faceless, impersonal, impacable unity and lack of individuality about the entire Judeo-Christian World. Both myths are just as false, but such ignorance leads to unnecessary death and destruction and an unwarranted feeling of justification in it. "Know your enemy, and your battle is half won." - Sun Tzu. He'd probably say we've slid back on knowing our enemy - and who our enemies actually our - to being halfway again from our starting point away from victory. 

 

My apologies, by "muslim" I refer to the powerheads of the Sunni Church (not that all muslims are this way, I was simply classifying those people by their main motivation) and the leaders of terror sects of the olden days who wished for the eradication of the Jewish state. Also, when God gives you the land, it is very different from legitimate spreading of civilization and faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

My apologies, by "muslim" I refer to the powerheads of the Sunni Church (not that all muslims are this way, I was simply classifying those people by their main motivation) and the leaders of terror sects of the olden days who wished for the eradication of the Jewish state. Also, when God gives you the land, it is very different from legitimate spreading of civilization and faith.

Your education is once again lacking. The "future of the Land of Israel" beyond the last recognized scriptures is a very murky and ill-defined issue that even the Zionists bickered about the meaning and implementation of, and plan for amongst themselves back in the 19th and early 20th Centuries, as there wasn't the clear consensus on the issue that you may think there was, and any prophecies standing on the issue are also as clear as mud. Certainly, no prophecy on the "future of the Land of Israel" speaks AT ALL of one empire conquering the land from another and granting it through a convoluted bureaucracy to the Jewish Diaspora (the British taking the Ottoman lands and creating the Palestine Mandate with the intention of creating a Jewish Homeland). That sort of resolution, though eagerly capitalized upon mostly by the Revisionist Zionists (the predecessors of parties like the Likud), far moreso than other Jewish faction at the time, is not even in the spirit of the Hebrew Bible's typical narrative of these affairs, where usually the Jews on their take their lands, are given them by God, or, if they've displeased God at that time, are punished by being conquered and put to misery. That's the typical Hebrew Bible narrative. Dependence on beneficent foreigners is not a typical part of that narrative, if you read. Also, even the Sunni sect leadership is much more fractured than you think. Powerful Sunni clerics in the Persian Gulf Monarchies (one of which houses Mecca and Medina) has made harshly-worded fatwas against Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi for his heresy, blasphemy, and presumption to falsely declare himself a Caliph. Also, Egypt and Jordan, former participants in the Arab-Israeli Wars, have officially recognized and come to peace with Israel. And now we address and "civilization and faith," by which I assume you mean the justification of colonialism and imperialism. Civilization is relative and subjective, and, contrary to the belief of many among both Christians and Moslems, who can't force "faith," no matter what draconian methods or laws you use. It's far easier to, in fact, in the hearts of those you're dealing, foster "resentment" and "demonization" of said religion than "faith" by such methods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Patine said:

Your education is once again lacking. The "future of the Land of Israel" beyond the last recognized scriptures is a very murky and ill-defined issue that even the Zionists bickered about the meaning and implementation of, and plan for amongst themselves back in the 19th and early 20th Centuries, as there wasn't the clear consensus on the issue that you may think there was, and any prophecies standing on the issue are also as clear as mud. Certainly, no prophecy on the "future of the Land of Israel" speaks AT ALL of one empire conquering the land from another and granting it through a convoluted bureaucracy to the Jewish Diaspora (the British taking the Ottoman lands and creating the Palestine Mandate with the intention of creating a Jewish Homeland). That sort of resolution, though eagerly capitalized upon mostly by the Revisionist Zionists (the predecessors of parties like the Likud), far moreso than other Jewish faction at the time, is not even in the spirit of the Hebrew Bible's typical narrative of these affairs, where usually the Jews on their take their lands, are given them by God, or, if they've displeased God at that time, are punished by being conquered and put to misery. That's the typical Hebrew Bible narrative. Dependence on beneficent foreigners is not a typical part of that narrative, if you read. Also, even the Sunni sect leadership is much more fractured than you think. Powerful Sunni clerics in the Persian Gulf Monarchies (one of which houses Mecca and Medina) has made harshly-worded fatwas against Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi for his heresy, blasphemy, and presumption to falsely declare himself a Caliph. Also, Egypt and Jordan, former participants in the Arab-Israeli Wars, have officially recognized and come to peace with Israel. And now we address and "civilization and faith," by which I assume you mean the justification of colonialism and imperialism. Civilization is relative and subjective, and, contrary to the belief of many among both Christians and Moslems, who can't force "faith," no matter what draconian methods or laws you use. It's far easier to, in fact, in the hearts of those you're dealing, foster "resentment" and "demonization" of said religion than "faith" by such methods.

 

I care not of any butchering of the truth of God's people, I care only that God sent down fiery light to Moses and that is where it led him to save His people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

I care not of any butchering of the truth of God's people, I care only that God sent down fiery light to Moses and that is where it led him to save His people.

And there's so much beyond that you really need to know. Ignorance is NOT bliss...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Ignorance is NOT bliss...

Agreed, but neither is eternal damnation my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

Agreed, but neither is eternal damnation my friend.

As for that, I think a LOT of people today who firmly have been convinced, or have convinced themselves, they are following Christ's tenets to salvation when, in truth, there actions, beliefs, and preachings, are actually anathema to the Ministry of Christ, will themselves be very shocked come Judgement Day. Christ's words and ministry have truly been mangled,  warped, and twisted out of proportion by the most vociferous and visible leaders of Christiandom, not just in the modern world, but for the last over 1500 years!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Patine said:

And there's so much beyond that you really need to know. Ignorance is NOT bliss...

Honestly Reagan04 is right in the way that this is a ploy by the muslims to regain land but it's very very clear that this is just a fight of two ideologies. Do people forget the only reason why the Palestine-Israel conflict exists is because Muslims oppressed Jews in Palestine and then Palestine got really upset that the rest of the world was even acknowledging Jewish struggle in the land of Palestine resulting in the creation of Israel.

 

It started with muslims hating jews which in turn made the jews collectively hate the muslims more and now the ball has shifted into another court. This is a ethnicity vs ethnicity situation (at heart) so yeah its not every muslim or every jew but most definitely it has religion next to the core of it, and that religious issue needs to be tackled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, wolves said:

Honestly Reagan04 is right in the way that this is a ploy by the muslims to regain land but it's very very clear that this is just a fight of two ideologies. Do people forget the only reason why the Palestine-Israel conflict exists is because Muslims oppressed Jews in Palestine and then Palestine got really upset that the rest of the world was even acknowledging Jewish struggle in the land of Palestine resulting in the creation of Israel.

 

It started with muslims hating jews which in turn made the jews collectively hate the muslims more and now the ball has shifted into another court. This is a ethnicity vs ethnicity situation (at heart) so yeah its not every muslim or every jew but most definitely it has religion next to the core of it, and that religious issue needs to be tackled.

While you have some points of shifting hatred, you seem to share @Reagan04's of ideologically and by intent and goals unified, fully-agreeing, and in full, unbroken lockstep Moslem and Jewish blocs, a very bad stereotype I think ALL people in the Western World could quickly disabuse themselves of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

While you have some points of shifting hatred, you seem to share @Reagan04's of ideologically and by intent and goals unified, fully-agreeing, and in full, unbroken lockstep Moslem and Jewish blocs, a very bad stereotype I think ALL people in the Western World could quickly disabuse themselves of.

No I am for a two state solution, a one state solution will just ensure that Israel will be allowed to abuse the muslims and while I'm not fond of islam as a religion, I can tell you that I'd prefer if people didn't suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

What is your stance in the recent UN resolution?

@vcczar, @Reagan04, @wolves, @Jayavarman, @Sunnymentoaddict

 

Now, before Anthony locks this thread, I'm going to give my answer to the thread question. Unfortunately, it's none of the options in your poll. I've come to believe the vote, or most upcoming Security Council don't matter. I'm of the belief the UN is quickly headed to being no more than the symbolic, toothless, and terminally-ill lion the League of Nations was when the 1930's came around. I believe, regardless of this vote, Netanyahu will have the same response to UN condemnation as Kim Jong-un does when he gets UN condemnation - giving the organization the finger, ignoring the resolution, and doing as he pleases. We saw the same thing when the League of Nations made their last two official condemnations of any nations' actions in that organization's history - when Japan invaded Manchuria in 1931, and when Italy invaded Ethiopia in 1935. So, frankly, I don't think it matters at all what the UN says or does anymore. As George Orwell cynically said when the UN was first created, "If you want something truly effective there, you need a World Government. Otherwise, don't bother with such a sham."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×