Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 7236

US vetoes force to protect Palestinians

Ok, so I can see the argument that this maybe one sided in a very deeply divided problem. But not allowing a UN observers in seems rather strange too me.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 10626

what do you mean? Israel not letting UN observers in or the UN not sending observers?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15664

I think he means the US exercising it's right of veto to stop the UN keeping an eye on what's going on over there.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 7236

quote:

---

Originally posted by skalie
I think he means the US exercising it's right of veto to stop the UN keeping an eye on what's going on over there.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15664

From the article

"The US has only vetoed five resolutions since 1990, all of them dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. The last one, in 1997, blocked a resolution demanding that Israel stop the construction of a settlement in east Jerusalem."

It appears that not only the original 5 countries have power of Veto in the UN, but also Isreal using the US as a proxy.

I found the last line of this article interesting.

Edit: "Wonder if they would have got away with it in the present political climate." Um they did. Seems like it was the second time.

Last edited by skalie on 12-16-2001 at 09:24 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 10626

ah, i kind of skimmed.

yeah i guess i dont get that either.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2000
Location:
Posts: 5131

It was my understandign that they veto'd because the resolution did not specifically mention terrorist suicide bombers.
They were trying to close a loophole for Palestine.

Don't remember my source, and I don't completely agree.

Just throwing that out there for the discussion.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15664

quote:

---

Originally posted by BnB
It was my understandign that they veto'd because the resolution did not specifically mention terrorist suicide bombers.
They were trying to close a loophole for Palestine.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2000
Location:
Posts: 5131

UN observers were part of the package, not the whole deal.
they got shot down in the process.
I believe they are supposed to be reworking it to include specific acts of terrorism as well. supposedly then they'll allow it to pass.

(mainly because most recent attacks have been suicide missions and Arafat is crying that he can't control individuals)

Once again, I don't agree on this, just tossing out info.
(and AGAIN I cannot remember my source,I just remember the content, so take or disregard as you all like)
Personally I think it was short sighted and dumb.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged