Call for ceasefire in Gaza receives 14 votes in favour, with Washington being the lone veto
The measure received 14 votes in favour, with the US the sole member to reject it. However, because the US is a permanent member of the council, it has the ability to veto any resolution brought forward
Unlike several previous resolutions regarding a ceasefire in Gaza, Wednesday's measure was brought forward by all 10 elected members of the Security Council.
The US has vetoed four previous attempts at calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, on most occasions being the lone vote against the measures.
Shows he and the Democratic leaders never intended to end the genicide. Just another sign the democrats no longer support anyone but the oligarchy. Yes the Republicans are worse by alot but people that are anti genicide, anti oligarchy, anti fascism, anti authoritarianism, etc don't have a party to vote for. Only the level of oppression they will see in the next 4 years.
Imagine a person having to choose between losing 2 of their limbs or losing all 4 limbs.
Democrats are basically the ones wanting to cut off 2 of your limbs
Republicans want to cut off all your limbs.
Thats what is is. I mean I voted against the party that wants to cut off 4 of my limbs, but I'm just sad that there isn't a party (that can actually win elections) that is saying "we don't cut off any of your limbs".
The draft resolution was aimed at calling for an "immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire" in Gaza and the release of all hostages held by Palestinian groups in the enclave.
I hate to break it to you but any hostages are most likely dead. Probably killed by the IDF themselves.
The people of Gaza are also starving to death. You think POW's are getting first dibs? They won't agree to release them because there aren't any alive.
Why is it wrong to call for the immediate release of the Israeli hostages in Gaza in exchange for a ceasefire? How does the prolonged suffering of the hostages and their families help the people of Gaza in any way? Is a unilateral ceasefire that doesn't guarantee the immediate return of the hostages "doing the right thing" to you?
Not that it never mattered anyway. The UN doesn't control whether a ceasefire happens or not, only the Israelis and Palestinians can decide when to lay down their weapons and release the hostages--and that should have happened a fucking year ago.
The ceasefire is about widescale collective punishment of a population that is half children resulting in famine and genocide. My point is the Biden administration could do the right thing for once instead of enabling it until the bitter end.
I'm not a US citizen, but I can understand why some people didn't wanna vote this time.
Even though Trump might be worse than Biden when it comes to this conflict, how can anyone vote for Kamala knowing that the death of more innocents will be on their conscience?
it's like the trolley problem. would you rather have more people die or a smaller but still sizable amount of people die? unfortunately in America there are only 2 viable candidates.
No more true than the free pass the Dems are giving Israel already. Nothing changes for Palestinians when the Dems are just as complacent and enabling as shown here and many times previously.
Despite the knee-jerk reaction from uninformed people here, they were absolutely right to veto it.
Any ceasefire deal should obviously demand the immediate release of every remaining Israeli hostage.
There is simply no justification for the withholding of these hostages who have been tortured and raped in Palestinian captivity for >13 months. The civilians of Gaza do NOT benefit from the continued torture of Israeli civilian hostages, so what is the rationale for not calling for their immediate release? Release the damn hostages, and only then can we have a meaningful path towards a ceasefire.
The OP did a quality reply already where he cites the article you've linked to debunk your own claims. But you could also have done with reading the OP's article until the second paragraph.
The draft resolution was aimed at calling for an “immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire” in Gaza and the release of all hostages held by Palestinian groups in the enclave.
At this point unquestionably spouting the official lies of the U.S. or Israeli governments is spouting genocidal propaganda and can only be seen as either hopelessly ignorant or bad faith.
The resolution that was put to a vote “demands an immediate, unconditional and permanent cease-fire to be respected by all parties, and further reiterates its demand for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.”
The release of all the hostages has always been a part of the ceasefire negotiations, that has never changed. Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
We've had mixed reports of treatment of Israeli hostages by Hamas (1, 2, 3) We know of at least one instance of sexual assault and rape, multiple accounts of abuse, how widespread it is we won't know until all the hostages are released, which Israel has been preventing.
Israel does torture, rape, and kill Palestinians (including children), and has been for decades.
Palestinian Prisoners in Israeli Prisons
Palestinians are jailed without charge, forced into false confessions, routinely tortured, raped, denied medical attention, and some killed as a result. This includes hundreds of children.
This isnt about the hostages to the Israeli Government, this is Israel engaging in Genocide to eradicate and forcibly displace the Palestinian people. Gaza has never stopped being under Israeli occupation since 1967. Hamas only exists because of the Apartheid Occupation of Israel and the daily violence that has subjected Palestinians to for generations. Israel has always been the obstacle for peace, and has been the one preventing a ceasefire.
Intentionally utilizing the presence of civilians or other protected persons to render certain areas immune from military attack is prohibited under international law. Amnesty International was not able to establish whether or not the fighters’ presence in the camps was intended to shield themselves from military attacks. However, under international humanitarian law, even if one party uses “human shields”, or is otherwise unlawfully endangering civilians, this does not absolve the opposing party from complying with its obligations to distinguish between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, to refrain from carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, and to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and civilian objects.
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.