Current Events > The United States isn't being laughed at by the world anymore.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiBRAGDGI3c" data-time="
---

Dude, Mansour.

Savage.
---

This seems like a biased story. When I see it on Fox & Friends, I will acknowledge that it has some merit.
---

Man, who could have guessed that having a manbaby as our leader would destroy our country's credibility on a global scale...
---

The laughter has been replaced by sad head shaking
---

The epic of complete failures
---

LOL the Epic Fail
---

I can't believe so many people are buying this. It's nothing more than foreign propaganda.
---

"It was a bad day for ambassador Haley but the real losers are the people of Gaza "

Sums it up well

"Everyone wanted to do this but then it was Vetoed" explains why the UN is useless. May as well not bother with it
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

"It was a bad day for ambassador Haley but the real losers are the people of Gaza "

Sums it up well

"Everyone wanted to do this but then it was Vetoed" explains why the UN is useless. May as well not bother with it

As someone unfamiliar with the workings of the U.N. this is always my biggest issue. I've read articles before that amounted to "U.N. suggests action to discipline country with veto power. Measure is vetoed. The end."
---

Shelhamer92 posted...

As someone unfamiliar with the workings of the U.N. this is always my biggest issue. I've read articles before that amounted to "U.N. suggests action to discipline country with veto power. Measure is vetoed. The end."

Pretty much

Russia, China and the US can all veto. So everything of note gets Vetoed because those nations won't go against their best interests and there are no major ideas that benefits all 3.

I mean France and the UK can Veto too but generally it's the Russia/China/US that do so.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I mean France and the UK can Veto too but generally it's the Russia/China/US that do so.

Actually China has used their Veto less than any other country. Russia/USA is the main one. Most of Russias also come from when it was the USSR. The USA has also been the main user for the past few decades.

Edit: Actually I think Russia may have taken the lead again in the past couple of years.

JE19426 posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

I mean France and the UK can Veto too but generally it's the Russia/China/US that do so.

Actually China has used their Veto less than any other country. Russia/USA is the main one. Most of Russias also come from when it was the USSR. The USA has also been the main user for the past few decades.

I think you're making a mistake if you're judging solely by numbers.

I mean I could be wrong but I struggle to think of more big issues where the US and France are opposed compared to the US and China or Russia and China.

"The US And Russia agree but France doesn't." feels weird compared to "The US and Russia agree but China doesn't."
---

You wanna know what failure is? The United Nations as a whole.

Get off our land, losers.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

I think you're making a mistake if you're judging solely by numbers.

I mean I could be wrong but I struggle to think of more big issues where the US and France are opposed compared to the US and China or Russia and China.

"The US And Russia agree but France doesn't." feels weird compared to "The US and Russia agree but China doesn't."

China has exercised their veto rights 14 times, every other country has used it at least 50% more times. Only France falls below twice as often. While they may have also been willing to use the right in somes case in the event other nations didn't it's not really possible to tell.

UnfairRepresent posted...

<I think you're making a mistake if you're judging solely by numbers.

JE19426 posted...

Look at these numbers!

Ok...
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Ok...

When you are arguing a nation uses something more often, the numbers are what matter.

why can't the other members veto'ed the veto?
---

Ricemills posted...

why can't the other members veto'ed the veto?

They don't have that power. If it's vetoed, it's vetoed.

JE19426 posted...

Ricemills posted...

why can't the other members veto'ed the veto?

They don't have that power. If it's vetoed, it's vetoed.

why can't they have that power?
veto system is stupid, no matter if 99% agrees, if the 1% has the right to veto then the agreement is cancelled.
---

Ricemills posted...

why can't they have that power?
veto system is stupid, no matter if 99% agrees, if the 1% has the right to veto then the agreement is cancelled.

The USA/UK/France/USSR/China refused to join unless they had veto rights, and the UN would be pointless if they weren't members of it.

...Okay, I don't understand anything about politics or the UN.

What the hell is a veto? From what I gathered from the video, this is true:

Ricemills posted...

veto system is stupid, no matter if 99% agrees, if the 1% has the right to veto then the agreement is cancelled.

---

JE19426 posted...

Ricemills posted...

why can't they have that power?
veto system is stupid, no matter if 99% agrees, if the 1% has the right to veto then the agreement is cancelled.

The USA/UK/France/USSR/China refused to join unless they had veto rights, and the UN would be pointless if they weren't members of it.

well yeah, but why UK can't veto US's veto or something like that? other than "the rules wont allow it", ofc.
---

TBH honest the only countries that should have veto power are the US and maybe China.
---

dezmomo posted...

...Okay, I don't understand anything about politics or the UN.

What the hell is a veto? From what I gathered from the video, this is true:

If any country out of thethe China/France/Russia/UK/USA want to stop a UN resolution going through, they can veto which stops the vote going though.

Ricemills posted...

well yeah, but why UK can't veto US's veto or something like that? other than "the rules wont allow it", ofc.

The countries would of refused to join and at the time that'd be seen as making the UN pointless.

JE19426 posted...

Ricemills posted...

well yeah, but why UK can't veto US's veto or something like that? other than "the rules wont allow it", ofc.

The countries would of refused to join and at the time that'd be seen as making the UN pointless.

and what's stopping them now? it's not the 1950's anymore.
---

Lord_Shadow posted...

TBH honest the only countries that should have veto power are the US and maybe China.

The power of the Veto was granted to the nations who "won" World War 2.
---

Ricemills posted...

and what's stopping them now? it's not the 1950's anymore.

They'd almost certainly refuse to agree to it, and leave the UN. France and the UK aren't as important as they were but the USA, and China (and Russia to a lesser extend) are pretty much necessary.

JE19426 posted...

Ricemills posted...

and what's stopping them now? it's not the 1950's anymore.

They'd almost certainly refuse to agree to it, and leave the UN. France and the UK aren't as important as they were but the USA, and China (and Russia to a lesser extend) are pretty much necessary.

"they" as in the members who have the veto rights? this only proves more that veto system is stupid.
it's like having corrupt politician having the right to prevent any laws on punishing corruptors.
---

JE19426 posted...

Ricemills posted...

and what's stopping them now? it's not the 1950's anymore.

They'd almost certainly refuse to agree to it, and leave the UN. France and the UK aren't as important as they were but the USA, and China (and Russia to a lesser extend) are pretty much necessary.

The issue is, if France and the UK lost their power, the UN would be in trouble. We know Putin has pull in the US and in China. A few calls, and he'd probably get whatever the Hell he wants out of the U.N. Putin hates the U.N. so...
---

People are finally getting tired of Israel getting away with all their war crimes, aren't they?
---

Ricemills posted...

"they" as in the members who have the veto rights? this only proves more that veto system is stupid.
it's like having corrupt politician having the right to prevent any laws on punishing corruptors.

I agree.

Sayoria posted...

Lord_Shadow posted...

TBH honest the only countries that should have veto power are the US and maybe China.

The power of the Veto was granted to the nations who "won" World War 2.

I mean technically it was the Nation's that won WW2 were US UK France and the USSR not Russia
---

Lord_Shadow posted...

I mean technically it was the Nation's that won WW2 were US UK France and the USSR not Russia

Russia got it because they are considered the USSR's succesor state.

JE19426 posted...

Lord_Shadow posted...

I mean technically it was the Nation's that won WW2 were US UK France and the USSR not Russia

Russia got it because they are considered the USSR's succesor state.

Oh I understand that but that should never of happened after the USSR collapsed purely in the interest of politically neutering America's enemies.
---

God damn, that slam by Palestine at the end.
---

Caution999 posted...

You wanna know what failure is? The United Nations as a whole.

Their idea of acting, is to send a strongly worded letter of condemnation, hoping that one of the transgressor's underlings will give them the gist of it.
---

Funkydog posted...

God damn, that slam by Palestine at the end.

Jokes on them they still have completely lost Jerusalem and more territory every month and after this petty remark I hope the Israeli settlement of their land continues.
---

What the fuck is the point of the U.N again?
---

Funkydog posted...

God damn, that slam by Palestine at the end.

considering the US vetoed the resolution that would have helped them, fully justified

and yes, the UN structure is deliberately set up with global hegemons controlling veto power, but they still have to persuade others to support their own resolutions to get what they want. as this showed, haley persuaded no one.

it is this gap in power that maintains a balance that is acceptable. that balance does mean the UN is toothless against all but the most rogue states, but a toothless organization is preferable to an international organization that can exert real dominion on a majority vote basis.
---

JE19426 posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

Ok...

When you are arguing a nation uses something more often, the numbers are what matter.

I disagree.

For starters The UK and France have not Vetoed anything since the 80s while 13 of your 14 China examples were since 1992. They've also frequently abstained from issues they know either Russia or the US are going to Veto.

On top of that the large marjoity of Russia's Vetos were in the early days of the UN. The 40s,50s and 60s. Making the numbers misleading.

The issue really is Russia/China and The US who will rarely agree on an issue which is contested. So they all Veto each other.

France and the UK are generally out of the equation. Going "But look, the UK has a higher number than France!" is just ignoring the current reality. There are no real major current issues that the say Russia, China and the US will agree on but France will Veto. That's not the current landscape.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

JE19426 posted...

When you are arguing a nation uses something more often, the numbers are what matter.

I disagree.

Lmao.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Repeats stuff JE already said in the post 13.

Yes. I'm already aware of that.

"The numbers aren't that important."
"But the numbers! They're important."
"The numbers aren't that important."
"WTF I already said that!"

Jesus Christ it's like talking to a 5 year old.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Funkydog posted...

God damn, that slam by Palestine at the end.

considering the US vetoed the resolution that would have helped them, fully justified

and yes, the UN structure is deliberately set up with global hegemons controlling veto power, but they still have to persuade others to support their own resolutions to get what they want. as this showed, haley persuaded no one.

it is this gap in power that maintains a balance that is acceptable. that balance does mean the UN is toothless against all but the most rogue states, but a toothless organization is preferable to an international organization that can exert real dominion on a majority vote basis.

That guy just sounded like he was butt-flustered by Trump. Yeah, take notes other nations: America is standing up for itself now. We have a set of brass balls, now. No more apology tour.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

"The numbers aren't that important."
"But the numbers! They're important."
"The numbers aren't that important."
"WTF I already said that!"

"When you are talking about how often something has happened it doesn't actually matter how often it happened."

Jesus Christ it's like talking to a 5 year old.

I'd copy this too but I think most 5 year olds, could make a better argument then the one you made in this topic.

Caution999 posted...

That guy just sounded like he was butt-flustered by Trump. Yeah, take notes other nations: America is standing up for itself now. We have a set of brass balls, now. No more apology tour.

id be pretty mad too if my countrymen were dying and someone was taking action to make sure those responsible were not even criticized
---

This is why the US is hated. Wont be surprised if a new anti-US terrorist group is formed.

Im not proud to be an American at all really.