Do you support the Palestinians' UN bid for statehood?

[project xxx1]

yep behind them 100 percent..........

[The Hammer]

yep behind them 100 percent..........

Fully behind them. But let's be honest ****** will continue the war crimes and the UN still wont do anything. Smh

Yes..........

Yeah, I support it.

...

[BattleAxePurist]

Considering ****** is a faux state anyway yes they should be allowed to have a part of their country back unfortunetly it won't happen until they arrange a peace agreement between the two sides. Even if they're granted statehood it wouldn't change the animosity that lies in the hearts@minds of certain factions in both societies. Neither ****** or the us will vote to allow the separation in hopes to settle the violence that takes place on a regular basis so what you would have is the same news coming from that region just no longer under the guise of a ******i occupation. This isn't an easy fix by just giving the *********s there territory and all would be smoothed over wouldn't be expecting this to become reality anytime in the near future. Besides there is the underlining aspect that ***** has the ***ish vote that he does not want to upset by not showing his support for them how much this plays into that IDK but it is to be considered.

[flipbjefrox]

of course!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jeradon84]

Ok so, from this thread I gather that most support ********* 's decision and that medved hates ******s

[The Hammer]

Palestinians rally in the West Bank to support statehood bid

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14997936

Diplomatic efforts over a Palestinian bid for UN membership are intensifying New York, while thousands have rallied in the West Bank to back the move.

Schools and government offices are shut to allow for demonstrations in Ramallah, Bethlehem, Nablus and Hebron.

US President Barack ***** is to meet both ******i Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas later in New York.

Mr ***** will urge Mr Abbas to give up the initiative, expected on Friday.

The US has vowed to veto the request in the UN Security Council, while backing ******'s view that direct talks offer the only route to peace.

It wants to give the "quartet" of mediators time to produce a statement that would be the basis for resumed peace negotiations, though efforts by US, European, ******n and UN mediators have yet to produce guidelines for the resumption of talks.

[Canelo Phresh]

Yes for damn sure. With that said the current borders should stay. If they want to keep on bombing over border disputes than they should shut the f@ck up about isreali bombing.

[GranTorino]

Are you for or against the Palestinians' UN bid to be recognized as a state?

****** won't be able to bully them as much without violating international law, if the Palestinians are officially recognized by the UN as a state.

[The Hammer]

***** addresses UN

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14997936

The US president's speech came as diplomatic efforts for Palestinian UN membership intensified, while thousands rallied in the West Bank.

"Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the UN," he said. "There can be no short cut to peace".

Mr ***** is to urge the Palestinians to give up the initiative.

He is to meet both ******i Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas later, before Mr Abbas is expected to present his membership bid to the UN Security Council on Friday.

Malcolm X talks about people like *****, who looks out for the interests of the Zionists instead of doing what's right:

[The Hammer]

Good article here:

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth...321715717.html

********* & UN: History of a double standard
Failure to resolve the Palestinian-******i conflict and ******'s 40-year occupation, in the words of UN former Secretary General Kofi Annan, would “continue to hurt the reputation of the United Nations and raise questions about its impartiality”.

No cause has consumed as much UN paper work as the plight of the displaced and occupied Palestinians. But hundreds of its resolutions on ********* have not been respected let alone applied for over half a century.

Nowhere has the UN ideals and mechanisms been more mired in power politics than in *********. The efforts to neutralise UN intervention have been championed mainly by the United States. This week’s efforts by the ***** administration working on behalf of ****** took advocacy into a whole new level.

Washington has vetoed more than 40 UN Security Council resolutions critical of its policies some of which were drafted by its European allies. A quick look at today’s Middle East makes it clear that such obstructions worked for the interest of neither party, nor for peace and security in the region.

Cold-War rivalries have also contributed to UN paralysis in the ******i Palestinian-Arab conflict, which explains why more than half of the 690 resolutions adopted by the General Assembly from 1947-1990 have been ignored.

But what justifies sidelining the UN ever since, while keeping it at an arm’s length from a two decades of Peace Process?

The short answer is a double standard.

All major post-Cold War conflicts have seen direct UN involvement including, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria and of late, Lebanon, South Sudan. Not the ********* problem. It was deferred to the US sponsored diplomatic process even though Washington’s close relations with ****** rendered it anything but an impartial broker.

Not only was Palestinian ******i conflict snatched out of the world body, most relevant US resolutions critical of ****** were ignored by the US sponsors.

Only after the peace process failed to yield a solution a decade later, did the Bush administration allow the United Nations to join, and even then, only as a junior partner in a newly formed International Quartet that includes the European Union and ******, all of whom are members of the UN!

Meanwhile, ****** has disregarded tens of thosands of resolutions, "censuring", "calling", "urging", "recommending", or "condemning" its attacks, settlement, deportations, occupation, etc.

Likewise, all pleas and demands for humanitarian and political interventions fell on deaf ears. The only time the UN was allowed to act, was in 1997 when it sent few international unarmed observers to the occupied city of Hebron. Alas, they weren’t mandated to speak publicly about the ongoing violations.

For the past four decades, ****** has violated all relevant UNSC council resolutions such as the resolution 465 of 1980 that strongly deplored all measures taken by ****** to change the physical character, demographic composition, institutional structure of status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.

It also rejected Resolution 476, which reaffirmed the necessity to end the ******i occupation of Arab territories ongoing since the 1967 war. The only UN Security Council Resolution that was accepted by the US and ****** as the basis of the diplomatic process, i.e. 242 of 1967, was also systematically violated. ****** has been expanding its settlement activity when the resolution notes the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force".

Paradoxically, ****** was created by a UN recommendation for Partitioning ********* in 1947, and was accepted as a new UN member on the basis of its commitment to respect its resolution, and specifically UNGA 194 regarding the return of the Palestinian refugees.

Now that all other venues have been tried and failed, including 18 years of bilateral negotiations, the UN Security Council must carry its responsibilities by demanding that ****** carry its obligations under UN charter and by recognising the Palestinian right for self-determination in a state of their own. Period.