miked10270 0 #1 March 14, 2003 Thought I'd post this little quiz fom Tony Blair (Governor Designate of the 51st State). Welcome to my U.N. Security Council Unreasonable Veto Quiz! You know I have faced some harsh criticism over the past few days. People have been accusing me of taking the law into my own hands by announcing that I might deem a veto by one or more of my co-members of the select five-veto-weilding club "unreasonable" and ignore it. I simply cannot understand the argument of these people. How can it been reasonable if a minority can be allowed the hold the will of the United Nations to ransom? Surely if we get the 9 votes we need, and therefore have a majority of countries supporting our bid for war, we would be morally right to ignore any veto. Think about it. Is it right for one veto-holding country to be able to kill a perfectly reasonable resolution? Is it right for just one veto-holding country to be able to destroy a resolution supported by a majority, or even all of the others? What if everyone voted one way, and a single country vetoed the resolution. That is surely absurd. I could never condone or support such injustice where a single country can veto the will of all the other members to serve its own interests and I am sure you agree too. As I will show this would be a terrible precedent. The French, Russians and Chinese have a lot to learn and could do a lot worse that take a history lesson of Security Council resolutions. Perhaps then they would see that the veto is not supposed to be a tool for one country to unreasonably impose its narrow will on the rest of the world, and finally you will see why I am totally behind President Bush and the American administration who understand the importance of the majority view and upholding international law. Enjoy the quiz! Question 1: In December 2002, a resolution was drafted (S/2002/1384) to condemn the horrendous killing by Israeli forces of several United Nations employees and the deliberate destruction of the World Food Programme (WFP) warehouse. 12 out of the 15 Security Council members supported this resolution but one country vetoed it. Who was that country? France China Russia United States Question 2: In December 2001, a resolution was drafted (S/2001/1199) to demand the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Palestinian-controlled territory and condemning acts of terror against civilians. In view of the number of civilian deaths, it was no wonder that once again 12 members (out of 15) supported the resolution, but one nasty country vetoed it. Who was it? France China Russia United States Question 3: In March 2001, a resolution was presented following more deaths of Palestinian civilians. Action was needed to stop the murder of these people and the resolution (S/2001/270) called for a UN observer force to protect the Palestinian civilians. The resolution got the majoity of 9 members it needed but one country vetoed the call to protect the civilians. Who could possibly do such a thing? France China Russia United States Question 4: Now here was a consensus view. In March 1997, resolution S/1997/241 demanding the immediate cessation by Israel of construction in East Jerusalem. Despite such an overwhelming support of 13 members to pass this resolution, one country stood alone and vetoed it. Who was the culprit? France China Russia United States Question 5: It gets worse! In March of the same year, a resolution (SC/1997/199) was presented to call upon Israel to refrain from East Jerusalem settlement activities. This time 14 (yes 14!) of the 15 Security Council members supported the resolution, but once again, a single veto-weilding country killed the resolution. Who bucked the view of the rest of the world and vetoed it? France China Russia United States Question 6: Ooh this was a bit serious. Resolution S/1995/394 presented for voting in May 1995 reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention (12/Aug/1949) to all territories occupied by Israel since 1967 and called on Israel to stop its activities which violated the Geneva Convention. Violating the Geneva Convention? Yes! No wonder 14 out of the 15 Security Council members voted "yes" to this resolution. The world was ready to stop Israel violating serious international laws, but, then one country went and vetoed it. Who was it? France China Russia United States Question 7: Same again really but this time in May 1990 (S/21326). 14 members tried to stop Israel breaking international law, but one lone country ignored the breaches and the view of the rest of the world and went ahead and vetoed the resolution. Who was the scoundrel? France China Russia United States Question 8: Don't worry not all UN resolutions concern crimes committed by Israel. 13 countries voted in January 1990 (S/21084) to condemn the violation of Diplomatic Immunities in Panama. One country decided to ignore world opinion and vetoed the resolution. Who was it this time? France China Russia United States Question 9: Phew 1989 was a busy year! Three resolutions (S/20945, S/20677, S/20463) against Israel and all three gained the overwhelming support of 14 of the 15 Security Council members. Incredibly, in each case, one country vetoed each resolution. Yes, one country vetoed three resolutions all passed by every other member. Who could do such a thing? France China Russia United States Question 10: Well, there are lots more, but we end in 1988. In this year there were two resolutions where Lebanon complained about Israel and a third resolution again condemning the actions of Israel. All three of these resolutions (S/20322, S/19868 and S/19780) received a massive 14 out of 15 votes, but again, in all three cases a single country killed the resolutions with its veto. Come on, come on, tell me, who was it? France China Russia United States End of the quiz. How did you get on? A big thanks to globalpolicy.org for the source information from the United Nations. Now let's see how you scored! Scoring Score 0 for every time you chose France, China or Russia as the guilty parties and score 10 points for every time you chose the United States as the country that used it veto. Now remember no one country should dictate policy and enforce a minority view, vetoing resolutions supported by the majority of the Security Council members. If we do manage to get 9 countries to support war against Iraq and France, Russia and China dare to ignore world opinion then it will be perfectly reasonably to ignore them and go to war anyway. Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #2 March 14, 2003 Ooooh Mike, I love your sense of timing. This thread will go on of two ways, it wil either be read and not responded to , therefore self burying. Or it will spontaneously ignite with irate colonials flaming back at you... By the way, Big Graemo Baxter is getting married, stag night at Brunton last weekend in May...... -------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fudd 0 #3 March 14, 2003 What if the US invaded Israel instead and gave the palestinians back their land, independence and freedom. What would be the odds that Sadam Husain/Irak would disarm according to UN resolutions then. Would the US be a terror target anymore? Why can Israel dictate the foreign policy of the USA. By the way, i've heard some rumors that they got nukes There are only 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarkF 0 #4 March 14, 2003 Quote Thought I'd post this little quiz fom Tony Blair (Governor Designate of the 51st State). That's funny, I thought that it was our very own Mr. McGoo (John Howard - listen to and watch him...Ooroo Mark F... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
miked10270 0 #5 March 14, 2003 Quote Ooooh Mike, I love your sense of timing. Yeah...! Wait 'til they're all busy bombing somebody else. Quote This thread will go on of two ways, it wil either be read and not responded to , therefore self burying. Or it will spontaneously ignite with irate colonials flaming back at you... I'd settle for it provoking some thought about UN Veto procedure - Let's face it, the UN Security council is the best model of irresolute government since the Polish Barons. The only way of getting a resolution passed in the UN Security Council is for one of the guest states to formulate a resolution against ALL the permanent members and that way they can't vote and hence use their veto! Thinking along those lines, maybe somebody should propose a resolution anong the lines of... "The UN objects to the indescrimate use of Veto by France, Rusia, Great Britain, China and the US and proposes that their right of veto should be permanently withdrawn". Since the 5 permanent members are named parties in the resolution they can't vote and veto it. Quote By the way, Big Graemo Baxter is getting married, stag night at Brunton last weekend in May...... I'd love to go, but by then the US Military will have finished building their sandcastles & I'd rather not give out advance notice of my movements just in case they have some ordanance left over.BTW, Who's the lucky girl? Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable. Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #6 March 14, 2003 QuoteI'd settle for it provoking some thought about UN Veto procedure There should be some method for overriding the veto. For instance in the US if the president vetoes a law, it can still be passed with a 2/3 agreement from congress. A veto with no override is too powerful. Maybe introduce some sort of override of the vetoes in the security council by a 2/3 agreement from the general assembly or something along those lines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #7 March 14, 2003 "BTW, Who's the lucky girl?" Its not WeeBucket, Lindsay, I don't think the intended is a jumper. -------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
