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 Israel will continue the war crimes and the UN still wont do anything. Smh

Yes..........

Yeah, I support it.

...

[BattleAxePurist]

Considering israel 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 israel 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 israeli occupation. This isn't an easy fix by just giving the Palestines 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 obama has the jewish 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 palestine 's decision and that medved hates muslims

[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 Obama is to meet both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas later in New York.

Mr Obama 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 Israel'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, Russian 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?

Israel 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]

Obama 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 Obama is to urge the Palestinians to give up the initiative.

He is to meet both Israeli 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 Obama, 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

Palestine & UN: History of a double standard
Failure to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and Israel'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 Palestine 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 Palestine. The efforts to neutralise UN intervention have been championed mainly by the United States. This week’s efforts by the Obama administration working on behalf of Israel 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 Israeli 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 Palestine problem. It was deferred to the US sponsored diplomatic process even though Washington’s close relations with Israel rendered it anything but an impartial broker.

Not only was Palestinian Israeli conflict snatched out of the world body, most relevant US resolutions critical of Israel 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 Russia, all of whom are members of the UN!

Meanwhile, Israel 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, Israel has violated all relevant UNSC council resolutions such as the resolution 465 of 1980 that strongly deplored all measures taken by Israel 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 Israeli occupation of Arab territories ongoing since the 1967 war. The only UN Security Council Resolution that was accepted by the US and Israel as the basis of the diplomatic process, i.e. 242 of 1967, was also systematically violated. Israel has been expanding its settlement activity when the resolution notes the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force".

Paradoxically, Israel was created by a UN recommendation for Partitioning Palestine 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 Israel carry its obligations under UN charter and by recognising the Palestinian right for self-determination in a state of their own. Period.