• Wilco@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yea, and the US “vote” is actually a veto. The US needs to lose its UN veto power because of shit like this.

      • Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The problem with this is that it’s either veto through vote or veto through force. The US can easily flip the table and walk out to try to enforce whatever it wants but that’s obviously bad for world peace so this is its ineffective but less destructive compromise.

      • vga@sopuli.xyzBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Right, and the dumb part now is that nobody in the world expects this to mean shit. Even if it would have been unanimous.

        You don’t solve world hunger with UN votes. You solve it with technological and economical advancement, by advancing women’s rights and with better access to contraceptives.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Gee I wonder what would it take to solve world hunger. Maybe a comprehensive strategic plan that changes minds of decision makers and pressures them through diplomacy and negotiations. Perhaps we could pool resources at the same time to distribute food to the countries most affected by sitemic historical injustice. Someone should manage that complex of a problem. Maybe a neutral governing body that ensures it’s well managed and countries pay something up front towards this problem. We should call it the league of countries against hunger, or the coalition of groups of people. I don’t know, I’m bad at naming things.

      • Wilco@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes, but the US no vote was an automatic veto. They had to remove anything that affected the US and then get all the other UN members to vote on it just to get it to pass. Any P5 nation with veto power can pull the teeth out of a UN resolution.

        A “no” vote from a P5 is always a veto. When any of the P5 vote “no” in the Council, a resolution cannot move forward. Council members can, however, resolve their differences and propose new drafts for a vote by the Council. They can also call on a vote from the wider UN membership – the 193 Member States that make up the General Assembly (GA).

      • Kissaki@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        What makes you think the second number is not a no vote?

        In 2021 they published reasoning with they will vote no.

        I tried to find a definite source, unfortunately there’s no immediate discoverability or reference. Gemini claims “The Standard Format: [Yes] - [No] - [Abstentions]”.

        • Asafum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          “We also do not accept any reading of this resolution or related documents that would suggest that States have particular extraterritorial obligations arising from any concept of a “right to food,” which we do not recognize and has no definition in international law.”

          I imagine this is the part they really object to. Real “Fuck you, I’ve got mine.” energy.

        • Soulg@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          They didn’t say it wasn’t a no vote, they said it wasn’t a veto

          • Kissaki@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Could the US have vetoed the whole process, and no vote would have taken place? Or what does this differentiation mean?

    • Knightfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Honestly, the UN has been a farce for a long time because of this exact issue. If a handful of countries have veto power then the whole point of the group was moot from the beginning.

  • Teppa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    To steel man their argument, dont agriculture companies like Monsanto develop resistance and things that get around real problems?

    If they cant patent their seed then how would those solutions come into being. Surely life saving pharmaceuticals could be classified the same, or shelter, yet we still allow private ownership of those things.

    • village604@adultswim.fan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The solutions should come into being by governments funding the research instead of funding wars.

      Same goes for pharmaceuticals (which the US does contribute a lot of money to)

      • Teppa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ah of course. Everything should be communist.

        I wish there was a label on peoples comments.

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      dont agriculture companies like Monsanto develop resistance and things that get around real problems?

      No, they don’t.

  • Etterra@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Israel: we disagree because we don’t believe our enemies deserve human rights.

    USA: yeah, and can’t profit off of people or oppress foreigners if you guarantee people food, either.

  • Big Baby Thor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Nestlé, claiming to be the country of Hydra, claimed a cultural and historic right to all the world’s fresh water, stating that it was promised to them 3000 years ago.

  • BygoneNeutrino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Personally, I don’t believe anyone has human rights. It is the wolves right to hunt the gazelle for food, and it’s the gazelle’s right to evade him. Although I am not against uplifting poorer countries, I feel like they would just become more wolves if they got their shit together.

    • Bigfishbest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      People are not predators and prey. A species that hunts its own kind is monstrous. Lions don’t eat other lions. Neither wolves, or tigers or any other mammal predators hunt and eat their own. To sort people into predators and prey is flawed on a fundamental Epstein-style level. Such people exist, and the vast majority of humans consider them abominations. As they should.

    • Encephalotrocity@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      This message brought to you by someone whom almost certainly would shit themselves and die if they ever encountered a wolf IRL.

    • smeenz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      To the idiots, the trend is that the US and Israel are the only great countries on earth.

  • ZiggyTheZygote@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m just waiting for the world leaders, one after another, to cut all ties with both these entities. Will they dare? Will they form a new alliance? Will the world unite against the true tyrants? Stay tuned.

    • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s already happening, but it’s in usually a slow disentangling of payment systems, software, tech, … Just cut and run would be very damaging. And like many things in politics it’s often two steps forward one step back.

    • Napster153@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They won’t unite out of morality, but preservation.

      Unfortunately, there may still be a long way to go, assuming the leadership doesn’t deny reality up until the nuke launches start.

    • psx_crab@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The Israel’s “anti-jew/antisemitic” rhetoric only works with the west, so it could take a very long time for leaders with bigger balls to just say “that’s not gonna work anymore”. USA is currently on the path to self isolation.

    • Bloomcole@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Our EU leaders are sell-outs and still US bootlickers despite their act.
      The ghoul VDL is blaming Iran for defending themselves.