Russia vetoes UN cease-fire resolution for Sudan
Russia vetoes UN cease-fire resolution for Sudan
US ambassador to the UN calls Russiaâs veto âshockingâ
-
Vetoes need to be abolished. But since the veto powers will veto any such motion, the UN is going to stay a toothless tiger.
-
the UN is performing as intended. that is, to maintain power for the old super powers and prevent anyone else from complaining too much.
-
I propose we switch to preferential voting, rolling dice or thunderdome for deciding these matters.
Personally, I would really like to see Trump wielding a chainsaw, but PV is my second choice.
-
No, after WW3 we will have the Commonwealth of Concord, just like we had the League of Nations, the Concert of Europe, the Peace of Westphalia... :/
-
-
Let me get this straight.
Russia can tell the UN to fuck off and continue to trade arms with embargoed countries, but also retain Veto powers?
-
Yes. The conditions of maintaining a veto doesn't relate to being a member in good standing.
-
That's what happens when you help win a world war and stockpile a few thousand nukes. You get a permanent seat at the table telling the rest of the world what to do.
-
Russia really, really wants war. But why?
-
Playing devils advocate: If the UN deploys security forces that will benefit the west who runs the UN. It might result in a similar resolution as what happened to Haiti with the UN keeping a US backed dictator in power.
-
-
No surprise there. Not too long ago they have given up their 'neutral' stance (wasn't really when Wagner was involved with the RSF) and gained support from the SAF for the construction of a Russian naval base, while the Wagner group still fights with the RSF.