US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Jimbuna]

So Russia once more exercise their veto in favour of Assad over an investigation as to who is responsible for the recent alleged chemical attack which took the lives of over eighty people (many of whom were children).

I'm not sure the UN is anything other than 'disfunctional'.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39585071

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

I'm not sure the UN is anything other than 'disfunctional'.

You're just now coming to that conclusion? It's been my feeling that any "good" that has been done by that organization is accidental.

[August]

Originally Posted by MaDef

You're just now coming to that conclusion? It's been my feeling that any "good" that has been done by that organization is accidental.

Well it did manage to keep 50 million south Koreans out of the clutches of the Kim family. I guess that's something.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

So Russia once more exercise their veto in favour of Assad over an investigation as to who is responsible for the recent alleged chemical attack which took the lives of over eighty people (many of whom were children).

I'm not sure the UN is anything other than 'disfunctional'.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39585071

A battle of declarations. Did you read either of the drafted resolutions?

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

I'm not sure the UN is anything other than 'disfunctional'.

agreed, but what is the alternative? better to keep talking than risk WW3.

I am always reminded of 1914 and the rush to war. So many missed signals and miscommunication.

One terrorist act spins out into a world war. Would WW1 have happened if the UN had been in place in 1914?

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

agreed, but what is the alternative? better to keep talking than risk WW3.

I am always reminded of 1914 and the rush to war. So many missed signals and miscommunication.

One terrorist act spins out into a world war. Would WW1 have happened if the UN had been in place in 1914?

I wonder what would happen if the rule about any one veto stopping a resolution as opposed to a majority vote (5 members) was implemented.

I should imagine Russia and China would veto any move in that direction of course.

As for WWI.....I suspect a UN in being would have little chance because too many parties were intent on settling a variety of old scores.

[ikalugin]

Pre-WW1 global security system differed from the post-WW1 global security system, from Cold War system and from the present day system. All of them are different. UN existing pre-WW1 would imply that the system is different from the historic one.

There is a reason why permanent UNSC members get a veto.

[Rockstar]

Agree or disagree the rules are in place and so far everyone seems to be abidiing by them and as long as we continue to do so we have order.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Agree or disagree the rules are in place and so far everyone seems to be abidiing by them and as long as we continue to do so we have order.

People do not abide by them which is why we have (relative) chaos.

For all the good reasons ofcourse.

[Rockstar]

I wasnt trying to imply there is world peace and order in the universe. It was just in reference to Russia having veto power in UN. Those are the rules.

[vienna]

Interesting developments in the Russian election interference cases:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/599d2e1...-uncovers.html




<O>

[Rockstar]

ummm, thats a headline an accusation or called beating a dead horse and a really old one at that. An interesting development will be when someone is actually charged with a crime.

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

ummm, thats a headline an accusation or called beating a dead horse and a really old one at that. An interesting development will be when someone is actually charged with a crime.

There needs to be an actual crime committed before that happens.

[vienna]

Oh, I think it is interesting in that the original sources of the intel regarding possible Russian influence and interference with US elections came from outside the US, was a situation where those sources recognized a situation potentially detrimental to US security, and occurred several months before the whole matter became an issue; and it is interesting that there is not even one mention of Obama, Clinton, or any of the other 'straw men' Trump, his associates or their 'deflection team' at Fox, Breitbart, etc., as being in any way responsible for any of the inception of the investigations. Also interesting, and alarming, is how the US intel establishment failed to pick up on the problem until several months after the sources reported their findings and concerns to those US agencies who should be most concerned with suspect interaction between foreign operatives and US citizens...

The insistence that there is no proof or a crime and therefore there should be no investigation is senseless; it is akin to police investigators entering a scene, finding bloodstains, signs of a struggle, or other such indicators, but since the scene had no body present, there is no cause to continue investigating. Or maybe like your home being burglarized, but since the burglars are not on the scene, there is no reason to investigate even though your door is busted in, the home has been ransacked, and you claim items are missing, because, really, its all 'circumstantial', isn't it? You don't conduct investigations because you know for a certainty a crime has been committed, you do investigations because there are indicators a crime may have been committed and you need to determine the actual circumstances and facts: you need to find the truth. This concept of actually finding the truth about something may be a foreign concept to some of the Trump followers, but it is the cornerstone of the US justice system...

Again, as I have pointed out before, none of the investigations or allegations based on those investigations to date have directly asserted Trump was either complicit or knowledgeable of any of the actions of his associates, and I seriously doubt the trail will lead to the door of the Oval Office. However, Trump is doing himself and his administration a serious disservice by trying to derail or obstruct the course of the investigations. If he is truly serious about "draining the swamp", he might appreciate any actions that get any 'gators' out of his administration; his bellicosity on the matter does little more than just give the unnecessary impression of being someone with something he wants to keep hidden and fears it may be divulged; oddly, Trump could take a lesson from his fellow philanderer, Bill Clinton: when the whole GOP 'masterminded' impeachment/Lewinski/etc. turmoil was going on, Clinton basically ignored it and just carried on with his duties; by not acting furtive or guilty, he came out of the whole ill-fated (for the GOP) situation looking a hell of a lot better then he would have had he angrily and frequently made public comments and denials. Even with the scandals, Clinton came out of it all as one of the most popular Presidents in the last 50 years. Trump should just let the investigations go on and let them take their course; it is very highly doubtful any of the findings will lead to him and he should act in like manner; ignore it and just do his job, something the US voters will appreciate more than any of his bellowing and/or tweeting...



<O>

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

So Russia once more exercise their veto in favour of Assad over an investigation as to who is responsible for the recent alleged chemical attack which took the lives of over eighty people (many of whom were children).

I'm not sure the UN is anything other than 'disfunctional'.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39585071

As long as you feel the same way every time the US vetoes measures against Israel.

I understand and agree with having permanent members on the UNSC, but I really wish the veto rule would go away. But there is no way any of the P5 will allow that.

It was an unfortunate but necessary compromise in the forming of the UNSC.

In any case The US is still pretty close to the Russians in the vetoing department