Archive for Sunday, November 12, 2006

U.S. vetoes U.N. resolution condemning Israeli offensive

November 12, 2006


— The United States vetoed a U.N. Security Council draft resolution Saturday that sought to condemn an Israeli military offensive in the Gaza Strip and demand Israeli troops pull out of the territory.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said the Arab-backed draft resolution was "biased against Israel and politically motivated."

"This resolution does not display an evenhanded characterization of the recent events in Gaza, nor does it advance the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace to which we aspire and for which we are working assiduously," he told the Security Council.

The veto unleashed a flurry of criticism in the Middle East.

"This decision by the U.S. government gives unlimited cover to commit more massacres of innocent Palestinians," said Ghazi Hamad, spokesman for the Hamas-led Palestinian government. "This is a shame on the American administration, which says it is trying to promote human rights and democracy in the Middle East."

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, however, the draft resolution would have aggravated the situation in Gaza because it contained "inflammatory and unnecessary language."

"We do not believe the resolution was designed to contribute to the cause of peace," she said in a statement.

In Jerusalem, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Mark Regev agreed the draft was one-sided. "It's good that it wasn't accepted by the Security Council," he said.

The draft received 10 votes in favor and four abstentions, along with the U.S. vote against. Britain, Denmark, Japan and Slovakia all abstained. The U.S. is one of five permanent members of the council that have the power to veto resolutions.

It was the second U.S. veto this year of a Security Council draft resolution concerning Israeli military operations in Gaza. The U.S. blocked action on a document this summer after Israel launched its offensive in response to the capture of an Israeli soldier by Hamas-linked Palestinian militants.

Israel has expressed regret for the loss of life in Beit Hanoun but said it will continue operations to stop militants from launching rockets into Israel. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is scheduled to visit Washington today to meet with President Bush.

Qatar's U.N. Ambassador Nassir Al-Nasser warned in the Security Council meeting that the failure of the body to act on the draft would lead to more Israeli violence against Palestinians.

"Any lukewarm reaction or response on our part gives the impression we are shirking from our humanitarian responsibilities," said Al-Nasser, who sponsored the resolution on behalf of the Palestinians. Qatar is the only Arab nation on the council.

Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa said the veto "will only increase the anger" toward Israel, and Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit accused the Security Council of "turning a blind eye to Israeli acts in Gaza."

The Arab League was planning to hold an emergency meeting of foreign ministers in Cairo, Egypt, today to decide how to respond the latest Israeli offensive.


cowgomoo 11 years, 5 months ago

Posted by Culture_Warrior (anonymous) on November 12, 2006 at 6:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)


"Our relationship with Israel is an entanglement our founding fathers knew well enough to stay away from."

Come again?

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

xenophonschild--Before you lump all religions into the same basket one more time, read my last posting. Either you're missing it or you're ignoring it, but one or the other must be true. Either way, it renders your 12:11 post pretty foolish.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago

Yes, of course, pogroms against Jews are terrible - have been for long before the Galilean was born. The latest holocaust was a stain on Western civilization that doesn't compare with what the Crusdaders, Russians, or Spanish did to Jews over the last millenium.

But that they were horribly victimized give them the right to treat Arab Muslims the same way the Nazis treated them?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 years, 5 months ago

Bolton and Condi love babies-- especially dead, Palestinian babies.

roger_o_thornhill 11 years, 5 months ago

Why can't an artilce like this include a link to be able to read the actual resolution. On it's face, it looks like more blind support for Israel in order to appease collective guilt for slow action in WWII. ( I mean even W's family did business w/Nazis until the govt. stepped in in like '42 or something like that. That's a lotta guilt to assuage.) Anyways, like I said, it SEEMS like that, but who know since the UN resolution isn't here to examine. Maybe it was "biased" and "politicially motivated", but how do we know? Should we trust Bolton and Rice? I always heard you can't trust anyone with a moustache.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago

Why do we continue to support Israel?

The evangelicals drool over their bibles and watch expectantly for their dead Galilean to bring the "rapture" in the wake of Israeli struggles in the Mid-East. Bible-thumpers have been slapped down - at least for a while - and we need to rethink our support for a nation of thieves who essentially treat Palestinians the way Nazis used to treat them.

American Jews should take the lead in steering a new course for America inre Israel. If their primary loyalty is to the United States - and not Israel - they should recognize the weight of negatives America bears needlessly for Israel, and allow us to withdraw our support for the Jewish state.

Ideally, a rational foreign policy is predicated on a country's best interests. Our long-standing relationship with Israel is more or less a one-way affair, with us carrying the load for a country that should not exist.

jonas 11 years, 5 months ago

I'm with Thornhill. Without the resolution itself to look at, this is all just yelling into the wind.

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

Our support is Israel is both principled and one-sided. We support Israel, not just for religious reasons that I agree are a piss-poor way to run foreign policy, but because they are a liberal democracy and the only one in that region. That said, we should be criticizing Israel when they engage in unwarranted or disproportional attacks against civilian targets. When we do less than that, we damage the prospect of democracy or other forms of transparent/responsive/accountable government in the Middle East. I haven't read the resolution, but a better choice on the part of the US would have been to veto while also issuing a unilateral, principled criticism of Israeli actions.

ASBESTOS 11 years, 5 months ago

"American Jews should take the lead in steering a new course for America inre Israel. If their primary loyalty is to the United States - and not Israel - they should recognize the weight of negatives America bears needlessly for Israel, and allow us to withdraw our support for the Jewish state."

Be careful there xeno, the "American Jews" vote for the Dems on a 5:1 ratio.

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

Jewish votes aren't quite that one-sided. Except for Reagan's re-elect (and Bush's, I don't have data there), GOP presidential candidates average 18% of the Jewish vote. Bush got 19% in 2000. Congressional races throughout the 1990's saw 73% of the Jewish vote going Democrat. Averaged over all elections, Jewish votes go Democrat 60-75%.

When Jews vote for Republicans, they vote for socially moderate candidates. More and more often, when Jews vote for Democrats, they vote for conservative Democrats. Still, they overwhelmingly vote Democratic. Friedman, American Jewish History 91.3-4 (2003) 423-438

ASBESTOS 11 years, 5 months ago

Go to "Real Clear Politics", and check on exit polling.

"asbestos, can you provide a link or valid source for that statement?"

"GOP presidential candidates average 18% of the Jewish vote. Bush got 19% in 2000. Congressional races throughout the 1990's saw 73% of the Jewish vote going Democrat. Averaged over all elections, Jewish votes go Democrat 60-75%."

as stated I said 5:1, that is less than 18% and 19%.

As for the 73% in congressional races that is about right or a 4:1 ratio, but STILL in favor of the Dems. Averaged over all elections, well that 60% seems a little low. COuld be true, but I would want to see several studies or polls of it before I believed it. Voters are pretty consistent, I think it is in the 75-80% range, with the polling I have seen. But Jewis votes ARE that one sided by your own data.


As for the opinion of Michelle. I have to agree Carville is a looney, and is sidekick Begala. Can these guys go anywhere on their own?? They have to show up together ALL THE TIME. It creeps me out the way they act.

They have to be in the majority all the time on a talk show, and then there is usually 2 shouting down one, ad in CNN "News Coverage" on election night. They are NOT a news organization, they are cheerleaders for liberals 1st, and second democrats. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You do need to watch O'Rieley. He really is "no spin". You won;t accept that, but he is.

And Fox "looks" like it is "Conservative" because it has equal sides for equal times. That is "fair and ballanced". It only looks biased because all the media outlets are liberals.

That is why we need Michelle. SHe is a bullwork against most of the BS.

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

ASBESTOS, check your math. 5:1 would be about 15%, which would be significantly below the average I posted. More importantly, I wasn't disputing the claim you were making. The overall point is that Jewish votes skew heavily Democratic. I just think that the argument (as with all arguments) is best made when its supported. I was responding more to the call for support than disputing you.

The 60% over all elections is pretty consistent when you consider the size/type of election. In smaller races, Jews tend to vote more Republican. That's not entirely surprising since Jewish populations are concentrated in urban areas. Republicans running for office in urban areas tend to be more moderate because urban areas trend farther left than rural/suburban areas. So, where a conservative Republican would have serious trouble winning a mayoral race in New York City, Rudy Giuliani is able to win and get a lot of Jewish support in the process.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago

Omert is meeting with Bush to discuss the ramifications of the recent election for Israel; this is the time for Democrats to begin withdrawing support for Israel, particularly Israeli offensives in Gaza and Lebanon.

More people are beginning to understand that it is the American businessman and American consumer products that are the best salesmen for American morals, values, and political change overseas. Soldiers and hacks for Kellog, Brown are effective only in the short term; long-term, we need a stable environment to sell our products in the Muslim world.

As long as we blindly support Israel in its aggression against Palestinian women and children, we will be viewed as enemies by too many in the Muslim world - and be shut out of their markets for generations.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago

If Israel had not stolen most of the land that comprises their nation today, there would be no war with Palestinians.

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

"If Israel had not stolen most of the land that comprises their nation today, there would be no war with Palestinians."

Ignoring the blatant ignorance in this statement is well nigh impossible. Israel was created (with the majority of the land that now comprises it) by international mandate. Over the course of 60 years, Israel has repeatedly captured land in wars fought in response to Arab aggression. Most of the land has been handed back to the Arab states who originally attacked Israel. Israel (and the British before them) made and continue to make mistakes with regard to Palestinians, Gaza, and the West Bank. Those mistakes should be criticized by the international community in a way that respects both Israel's right to exist and the Palestinians' right to self-governance and prosperity. But those mistakes no more dejustify their existence than the American practice of stealing (and keeping) land from Native Americans and killing them dejustifies the existence of the United States.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago

"International mandate" - who were those demigods who could so cavalierly take land from Palestinians and "give" it to Jews?

"International mandate" is not a credible excuse for Israeli thievery during and after the '48 war. Innocent Palestinians were stampeded by war - like civilian populations since the beginning of time - but, when the crisis passed and they tried to return to their homes, businesses, schools, farms, and lives, Israelis prevented them from doing so, herding them into refugee camps that are nothing less than indictments of the Jewish state.

It is not necessary to be "anti" anything, as long as you are pro-truth. Some who post on this site simply don't know, or refuse to accept, the truth.

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

""International mandate" - who were those demigods who could so cavalierly take land from Palestinians and "give" it to Jews?"

The same ones who spent the better part of the 18th and 19th centuries cutting the world up. Did they do it well? The evidence points overwhelmingly to "no". Would abandoning Israel in some way correct that? Of course not.

The refugee camps, by the way, are an indictment of both Israel and the rest of the Arab world. The Palestinians were refused emigration to all other Arab states even as they were mistreated in Israel.

As for the Jewish opinion on the subject, both in Israel and in the US, it's pretty strongly in favor of a peaceful, two-state solution. The only thing standing in the way of that solution is Palestinian terrorism (usually sponsored by Arab countries), right-wing Jewish militants in Israel (frequently emigres from the US), and politico-religious fanatics in the US (overwhelmingly Christian).

Finally, despite Marion's endorsement of my post, I don't second his labeling of anyone as "anti-Jew", nor do I endorse right_thinker's blatantly racist characterization of Arab terrorists.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago


Good post. A challenge for Democrats will be to forge a new approach to dealing with Palestinians, one independent of blanket support for Israel.

I suggest you all extend a measure of understanding to right-thinker. He was mentored on this site by an evil fascist and has yet to cleanse his palate of the wretch's poison.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago


You citation is Jewish propaganda. It does not address what Israelis did during and after the '48 war to deprive Palestinians of their land.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago


I readily confess to extreme skepticism about a religion that holds a central tenet that its adherents are "The Chosen People of God," while everyone else is . . . not.

The process by which this concept became cemented in Jewish doctrine and ideology is understandable - they were decimated by foreigners, their kings failed them, they had to use their religion to maintain their cultural and racial identity - but not entirely praiseworthy. Judaism is the second-most repugnant sky-god religion (Islam is first, Christianity third) and anything that dilutes and dissipates their religion is a good thing.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago


Your understanding of history - both Western European and Mid-East - has wide, gaping holes in it. Instead of googling for your information, I suggest you read Durant, The Story of Civilization - IV, The Age of Faith, in its entirety - as I have three or four times - and focus on Chapter XXIII - The Crusades: 1095-1291.

Sometime, when you have a free moment or two, you might also consider the ramifications of the Mongol devastation on Islam at the end of the 13th century.

But let us not wander too far from our basic premise. It is past time for the United States to begin shifting our support from Israel to Palestinians. We should encourage Israelis to treat Palestinians as equals, to give them back their land and, perhaps more importantly, their water. We should encourage Israelis to emigrate to America, where they would be welcome additions to the intellectual, artistic and financial nuances of our country.

Bubarubu 11 years, 5 months ago

xenophonschild--I'm guessing your understanding of Jewish theology is, at best, incomplete. Jews do believe that they are God's chosen people, chosen to receive the commandments and the law. Jews do not believe that the law applies to anyone else though. The idea of an afterlife in Judaism is hazy at best, but whatever rewards are available to Jews are also available to everyone else. Read up on the Noahide laws. There are seven of them and all but one of them are negative laws ("don't do __"). None of them require adherence to a faith, none of them require belief in God. The "chosen people" distinction in Judaism is one that sets Jews apart from, but not above, the world. Christianity's chosenness and Islam's chosenness operate very differently. Rather than lump all religions in together as you are wont to do, try your hand at studying something, learning something, and not being an ignorant bigot.

Laura 11 years, 5 months ago

Xeno said, "American Jews should take the lead in steering a new course for America inre Israel. If their primary loyalty is to the United States - and not Israel - they should recognize the weight of negatives America bears needlessly for Israel, and allow us to withdraw our support for the Jewish state."

I am loyal to the United States, but recognize that in the event of another Holocaust, loyalty to Israel is necessary to my very existence. Jews learn the hard way that we cannot depend on even our countries of birth to defend us and make sure we're not put in cattle cars or turned away in our ships as we attempt to dock on "safe" shores.

I am not going to get dragged into this fight again. That's it folks, from the Jewish contingent.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago


When you insult Durant as "anti-religous," you lose all credibility. He a great historian, perhaps the greatest, and for you to denigrate him is specious nonsense.

He discussed the Byzantine Empire at length - perhaps you should read his work on the Renaissance and the religious nuances of the Eastern and Western churches.

That they are the Chosen People of God is a central tenet of the Jewish faith; for anyone to infer differently is disingenuous. Jews think they are better than others because of their religion and religious/cultural history. It is past time we cease support for such supercilious elitists.

xenophonschild 11 years, 5 months ago

Racism? I think not.

I have a long history of posting my disdain for all the old sky-god religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism), and particularly for those who give their loyalty to these tired, pathetic excuses for god-creation myths.

If there is a god - a sublime abstraction much, much too complex for us to understand - these man-made stories are blasphemies against it.

Israel is wrong, and we pay too heavy a price to support it.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.