The measure received 14 votes in favour, with the US the sole member to reject it. However, because the US is a permanent member of the council, it has the ability to veto any resolution brought forward
Unlike several previous resolutions regarding a ceasefire in Gaza, Wednesday’s measure was brought forward by all 10 elected members of the Security Council.
The US has vetoed four previous attempts at calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, on most occasions being the lone vote against the measures.
Removed by mod
As somebody actually living in “Israel” what the hell are you talking about? Bibi and other far right politicians want to occupy Palestine and genocide every Palestinian. I wonder what would happen if the “good” Israeli soldiers stopped massacring civilians or if Bibi offered the Palestinian people anything other then oppression.
So, if you’re living in “Israel” aren’t you actively part of the “genocide” that you’re describing?
The Palestinians are just as responsible for putting shitheads like Sinwar in power as the Israelis are responsible for putting shitheads like Netanyahu in power. Both groups of people have empowered the genocidal extremist warmongers at every opportunity, and y’all want to blame American politicians for the sad state of the nations that were handed to you on a silver platter by the League of Nations after the fall of the Ottoman Empire?
As someone actually living in “The United States of America”, I’m sick and tired of my democracy and tax dollars being held hostage because of your problems, and I ain’t the only one.
When did I mention America? I said Israeli politicians suck and in addition I’m actively trying to leave (not easy)
As an American, aren’t you actively part of Trumps attacks on minorities?
Can I blame you for the “war on terror” and every other American crime against humanity?
If no, why is this person to blame for Israel? If yes, well at least you’re consistent.
It was a rhetorical question.
IF one believes that Israel has no right to exist as a nation (anti-zionists) and that the land was stolen from the Palestinians (which, historically speaking isn’t even true, because there was never a unified Palestinian nation until the Mandate for Palestine), then logic simply follows that by living in that “occupied Palestinian land” you are “an occupier”, does it not?
Your specific analogies to that are bad, because you can live in America without participating in Trump’s policies or the “war on terror”.
A better American analogy would be to say that everyone who lives in America is complicit in benefiting from the genocide of the Native Americans, whose historically inhabited these lands. And in that case, yes, we Americans are just as guilty as benefiting from the actual genocide of the Native Americans to the hypothetical “genocide” of the Palestinians.
In other words, IF one believes that Americans are unjustly living on occupied Native American lands, then I am guilty of that, just as all Americans are. That’s not a political statement, it’s a logical one.
And yet, you don’t hear anyone sane calling for the entirety of the United States to be returned to the Native Americans, because history doesn’t work that way. The best Americans and Native Americans can hope for today is peaceful coexistence, equal treatment under the law, and a mutually beneficial society that acknowledges the wrongs of the past while working towards a better shared future.
Personally I believe in a peaceful two-state solution in which both Israel and Palestine can not just exist, but thrive harmoniously as neighbors destined to live in the same culturally and religiously significant slice of land. But unfortunately the people currently in charge, like Netanyahu and Hamas, do not think that way, and under Trump I believe there will be an unmitigated, scorched earth, full-fat genocide of Gaza Strip and probably the West Bank too.
There have always been pathways to peace, but they rely on the good faith actions of Israel and Palestine far more than anyone else.
The Palestinian resistance will never stop until they get all the land
Except they have already agreed to a two state solution.
Yeah when they started killing civilians in an effort to tank the Oslo Accords
What does “Palestine will be free from the river to the sea” mean to you?
Any agreement from the Israelis or Palestinians isn’t worth its weight in shit.
It means unless Israel agrees to a two state solution Palestinians will resist to recapture their stolen land.
Hamas accepts Palestinian state with 1967 borders
I wonder if you actually read that article?
jk, it’s clear you didn’t
I wonder if you actually read that article?
jk, it’s clear you didn’t
Lol, your entire article is about how they only accept a Palestinian state, not an Israeli one
Here’s the funniest quote:
What makes it their land in the first place, some British mandate written by the same people who created the state of Israel?
100 years ago the entire area was part of the Ottoman Empire, both nations of Israel and Palestine are fabrications.
The fact that they were living there, as their families have been for generations and generations. What gives Zionists the right to ethnically cleanse and forcibly displace them from their homes?
You keep posting these propaganda images every day, is it your job or just a hobby?
At any rate, all your image shows is that there was never a Palestinian nation state to begin with. So again, the question remains “what makes it Palestinian land in the first place?”
By your own admission, this region (home to both the original Israelites, Judea, Hebrews, Philistines, and dozens of other nomadic tribes) has been passed around by empire to empire for thousands of years.
The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. The Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966 maybe, but he’s not Palestinian.
It doesn’t matter who it was started by or whether the resultant state was democratic or secular, as it is an open proclamation of an intent to wipe Israel off the map. It doesn’t take a geography expert to point out that all of Israel exists between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, does it?
You cannot claim to be anti-genocide if you support wiping Israel off the map.
You cannot claim to support a two-state solution if you support wiping Israel off the map.
Any one-state solution amounts to genocide of the other state, fucking duh.
Removed by mod
A two state solution is impossible due to the settlements in the West Bank. Only a One-State Solution with equal rights for both Israelis and Palestinians is possible now
Netanyahu is the one who has explicitly said that ‘from the river to the sea there shall be only Israeli sovereignty’. A direct reference to the ethnic cleansing of all Palestinians.
Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
One State Solution, Foreign Affairs
Well in that case I guess you’ll be glad to know that a one-state solution seems to be on the horizon–where Israel is the one state that controls the region.
Not my preference, but I don’t make the rules.
No.
This isn’t about Hamas or the hostages - it’s about the Israeli hard right’s desire to utterly destroy the Palestinians and rule over all the land from the river to the sea, and Netanyahu’s need to maintain enough support to stay in office and out of prison.
You say that as if the Palestinians don’t have an equal desire to utterly destroy the Israelis and rule over all of the land from the river to the sea.
If I remember correctly it was the pro-Palestinian groups all over the world who were chanting “Palestine shall be free from the river to the sea”, was it not?
At any rate, this is 100% about the hostages, as the US’s reason for voting against this gesture was because it did nothing to call for the immediate release of all Israeli hostages in the Gaza Strip. Why is it wrong to demand that the hostages be freed?
the terrorists should definitely hold onto the israeli hostages then, since as we’ve seen, that’s working out so great for the people of gaza they say they’re fighting for, every single day it’s working out great. the israeli government is fine with this. great plan.
Bold of you to assume that it would stop if Hamas and Hezbollah ceased to exist.
Bold of you to assume that Hamas and Hazbollah would stop attacking if a ceasefire were agreed to. (See every previous ceasefire over the last 60 years.)
Well, especially if Israel keeps funding Hamas to destabilise and discredit Palestinian effort. Oh wait…
In the meantime, innocent people keep getting killed.
And so, following your circular logic, this supposed ceasefire does what exactly? Clearly it’s just useless bullshit, just as you yourself pointed out.
This centuries long holy war isn’t something that a bunch of Western politicians, UN bureaucrats, and keyboard warriors are going to solve with performative political crap.
How that much isn’t clear to everyone now 13+ months after the October 7th massacre is fucking beyond me…
Removed by mod
I’ve never pretended that I’d singlehandedly solve the conflict, but it’s now very clear that the people who have the power to stop the ongoing massacre pretty much instantly, openly choose not to.
A long term solution is also obviously out of reach for roughly the same reason.
As long as Israel is occupying Palestine they will never be completely be safe.