China and Russia Veto UN resolution on Syria

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by fox10078, Feb 4, 2012.

  1. fox10078, Feb 4, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2012

    fox10078 macrumors 6502

    fox10078

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #1
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-16890107

    Truly sad.
     
  2. Fazzy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Location:
    check the tracking device
    #2
    Why is it that Libya got NATO military intervention and Syria did not?
     
  3. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #3
    Syria has very little oil.
     
  4. (marc) macrumors 6502a

    (marc)

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Location:
    the woods
  5. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
  6. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #6
    Because of China and Russia, the UN is largely useless....more useless than congress even. There really isn't much of a point to it if they cannot help solve critical human rights and lives issues such as this one.
     
  7. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #7
    They Chinese and Russians are not the only ones abusing veto powers. Look at the US voting record when it comes to any issue to do with Israel.
     
  8. (marc) macrumors 6502a

    (marc)

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Location:
    the woods
    #8
    Sure, so the veto power should be removed completely.
     
  9. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    Look at the following on UN vetoes:

    [​IMG]
     
  10. skunk, Feb 4, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2012

    skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    Who exactly are the Syrian opposition? For all the good intentions at grass-roots level, the Libyan effort has been pretty swiftly subverted. Egypt is in no better shape, either. "Arab Spring", my arse. Better to hold out for a political settlement, however distasteful.
     
  11. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #11
    As always, "Follow the money."
     
  12. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #12
    That is the downfall of the UN in the last few years. Every nation should have just one vote.
    The veto is the tool of the idiot, who cannot convince others, so blocks any thing that they disagree with. (just like Sheldon)

    The same is true with the European Union the veto should also go.
     
  13. ChristianJapan macrumors 68040

    ChristianJapan

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Location:
    日本
    #13
    Think so too: veto should be replaced; or could be overruled with a second 75% majority (or any other solid number above 50%)

    And for sure: EU should start with that ...

    The problem with Syria is that's one of the last Russia influenced areas in middle east. They will not let it go. Iran is the other issue.
     
  14. malman89 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 29, 2011
    Location:
    Michigan
    #14
    Yeah, so removing the post-WWII era, the USSR/Russia has vetoed far less often. Point?
     
  15. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    Point is, the Russians are not just spoilers, they often have legitimate concerns. The US giving diplomatic cover to the "Zionist regime" - to coin a phrase - is no less to blame for wholesale human rights violations committed under their protection. And if you really think Russia, or anyone on the UNSC would give up their veto, think again.
     
  16. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #16
    Sorry skunk, but it's too late for you to coin that phrase, the "Islamist Regime" has claims to authorship long ago.

    But other than that, you're right that no country is apt to give up their veto....doing away with UNSC veto power would likely bring about the effective end of the UN
     
  17. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    I didn't really want to make a point, and to just show the data.

    What it shows to me is that since 1966 the US has used its veto far more frequently than the UK, France, Russia or China, and that the USSR/Russia, China and France have used it pretty sparingly.

    Additionally in terms of being "fair and balanced" the media will get far less excited about the "Zionist regime" after the next US veto than this one by the Chinese and the Russians.
     
  18. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #18
    cannon fodder it seems;

    above from BBC, and this below from Aljazeera;

    no doubt Assad will declare a political settlement when it's convenient
     
  19. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #19
    As much as I'm against wars, I think an intervention similar to the one in Libya could be successful in bringing down Assad and result in less deaths than allowing him to continue killing his own citizens until they leave the streets.
     
  20. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #20
    Agreed. But I worry about what would rise up in place. From a historical perspective it seems like this region of the planet will always be unstable no matter what is done. Too many tribal factions that don't seem to be able to live in harmony. I wish people could just put aside their differences on this planet and learn to live with one another peacefully.
     
  21. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #21
    There definitely is a valid concern that once Assad goes radical Islamists could take control in the resulting chaos, but I don't know that they would be much worse than Assad. What I am sure of is that if the international community doesn't step in Assad will keep killing his people until they either leave the streets or are all dead, and it will take a lot more deaths to get the people off the street. I think at this point we have the choice between standing by and letting thousands more civilians die, or taking the risk of removing Assad and hoping that something better comes in. Of course there is the chance that the Syrian people will successfully remove Assad and politically for the west it'll be hard to work with the new Syrian government if we just abandon them...
     
  22. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #22
    I agree. Assad's forces need to be stopped and an intervention like Libya would diminish the Syrian's ability to slaughter their own people. At the very least, stopping the artillery and helicopter strikes against Homs would help. Even the threat of military action might be enough.

    While both Libya and Egypt are a mess today, allowing Syria to continue will only give power to the worst elements of modern Islamic society. Afghanistan after the Soviet invasion seems like a useful lesson. The world's general refusal to engage gave rise to Al Qaeda. What do you think will come from Syria?
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    No, the US's "secret" support for Bin Laden led to Al Qaeda.
     
  24. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #24
    Damnit, I meant to write the Taliban.
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    I fear that if Assad goes, all hell will break loose. Intervening on one side in a civil war is a dangerous business, and not at all supported by the UN Charter.
     

Share This Page