Does that mean the US has been betrayed?

[gxnn]

I am surprised to read the news that Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the three member countries of the Five Eyes Alliance issued a joint statement of prime ministers that calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, which is against the decision of Israel supported by the US. And these three countries also voted in favor of the same resolution of the UN assembly, whereas Israel, the US, the UK and other few countries voted against it.
Does that mean the big brother the US has become intolerable and betrayed by his small brothers?
Joint statement of three nations

 

[ll74]

I am surprised to read the news that Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the three member countries of the Five Eyes Alliance issued a joint statement of prime ministers that calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, which is against the decision of Israel supported by the US. And these three countries also voted in favor of the same resolution of the UN assembly, whereas Israel, the US, the UK and other few countries voted against it.
Does that mean the big brother the US has become intolerable and betrayed by his small brothers?
Joint statement of three nations

The UK actually abstained in the vote.

 

[HisArpy]

I think it's an alliance of appeasement. Just as many urged Europe to go along with Germany's plans of conquest until Churchill came along.

Those who believe that giving a bully their lunch money means that the bully will leave them alone are the dumbest of the dumb. They know better but they'll willingly give their life's blood away in order to prevent being scared.

 

[ll74]

That being said, the flip flopping on the US on international positions has reduced credibility of the US over time and bolstered other countries' confidence in defiance of the US position.

This is also the kind of shit that happens when politicians talk about.leaving historically strong alliances like NATO or the UN.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Does that mean the big brother the US has become intolerable and betrayed by his small brothers?

No, it just means free Countries can and will have different view points on world affairs.

 

[gxnn]

No, it just means free Countries can and will have different view points on world affairs.

I find most of the people around me share the same opinion that the US is behind this said joint statement to test the reaction of Israel and other countries because it has been apparently annoyed by the war cabinet of Israel after Netanyahu openly showed his impatience to the US, but it needs a ladder to go off the main stage, otherwise it will lose face.
By the way, if the US does care about its good son Israel, it should give out of its widespread territory a plot of land the size of half Maine to Israel to cure the prennial headache.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

^^^ I agree with the commie bastard.

 

[PaxNurgle]

That being said, the flip flopping on the US on international positions has reduced credibility of the US over time and bolstered other countries' confidence in defiance of the US position.

This is also the kind of shit that happens when politicians talk about.leaving historically strong alliances like NATO or the UN.

Basically I agree with this. I have always generally supported American isolationism to some degree but the previous administration was too reckless and irresponsible with how they went about it, and the result is America's standing in the world has, I believe, been compromised as a result.

 

[KeithD]

I think the United States is teetering on its last nerve in not calling for a cease fire as well--unless Israel can become more precise in knocking off identifiable Hamas rather than probable civilians.

 

[ishtat]

I do not think that the USA would have been the slightest bit surprised, or annoyed, at this call for a ceasefire. I suspect that The US is right behind Israel, but totally sick and tired of Netanyahu's arrogance.

 

[dmallord]

I am surprised to read the news that Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the three member countries of the Five Eyes Alliance issued a joint statement of prime ministers that calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, which is against the decision of Israel supported by the US. And these three countries also voted in favor of the same resolution of the UN assembly, whereas Israel, the US, the UK and other few countries voted against it.
Does that mean the big brother the US has become intolerable and betrayed by his small brothers?
Joint statement of three nations

I do not believe the USA is intolerable or being betrayed by alliance members. It is still operating normally within the concepts of the alliance's agreements; no one is leaving the alliance over this issue. The countries calling for a ceasefire are doing so on humanitarian grounds over the huge loss and suffering of the civilian population. The USA is as sensitive to the harm as they are. However, the first three mentioned have no 'skin in the game' concerning this part of the globe and consequently do not have to contend with the effects a ceasefire would have on the ability to put a stop to the Hama government's avowed goal of eradicating Israel. We have a commitment to defend Israel that they do not in that regard. [Noted by others, the UK did not vote against this - abstained instead.]

The suffering situation is terrible. The Arab world isn't as helpful as it could be either: ex. Egypt blocked exits of the Palestine people, even many requiring medical treatments, and only recently accepted some wounded for treatment.

War is hell. I've been there. It brings death, destruction, and the aftermath is so damn long-lasting. It - never - passes away, and future generations feed upon the angst of their ancestors over it. This will not pass quietly into the night, no matter the pleas for it to stop. It is an ongoing lesson in history that perhaps will one day cause others to realize that a hard truce is about the best possible solution - one that allows life in safety on both sides.

 

[colddiesel]

. However, the first three mentioned have no 'skin in the game' concerning this part of the globe and consequently do not have to contend with the effects a ceasefire would have on the ability to put a stop to the Hama government's avowed goal of eradicating Israel. We have a commitment to defend Israel that they do not in that regard. [Noted by others, the UK did not vote against this - abstained instead.]

The suffering situation is terrible. The Arab world isn't as helpful as it could be either: ex. Egypt blocked exits of the Palestine people, even many requiring medical treatments, and only recently accepted some wounded for treatment.

Canada, Australia and NZ, all have skin in the game but in the form of significant Moslem communities. Canada 2.7 million(6%), Australia 1 million (3%), NZ has very few. UK who abstained has 3.9 million (4%) moslems but that minority accounts for 33% of the total increase in the UK population in the last ten years. The USA has less than 1% moslems, 2.55 million and a greater number of Jewish people.
Egypt has no time for Hamas because of their close association with the insurrectionist Moslem brotherhood, and Jordan is an impoverished country, unable to cope with the 2 million Palestinian refugees it already has.

 

[dmallord]

Canada, Australia and NZ, all have skin in the game but in the form of significant Moslem communities. Canada 2.7 million(6%), Australia 1 million (3%), NZ has very few. UK who abstained has 3.9 million (4%) moslems but that minority accounts for 33% of the total increase in the UK population in the last ten years. The USA has less than 1% moslems, 2.55 million and a greater number of Jewish people.
Egypt has no time for Hamas because of their close association with the insurrectionist Moslem brotherhood, and Jordan is an impoverished country, unable to cope with the 2 million Palestinian refugees it already has.

That's informative information. Thanks for that. It leads me to ask how much those small numbers influence decisions within those countries to have voted on the ceasefire that @gxnn started asking about. Was it about a rise of minority voice concern, or was it a concern for humanity? It would be welcomed and a warm glow if it were concerns over human suffering rather than political pressure from small citizen clamor.

I noticed that Gxnn wryly suggested the USA offer a plot of land here to relocate Israel. Young people are so eager to offer advice on solving world problems. Not that I take that as a serious consideration. Why not offer space for them to build on the moon where no one has laid claim on territory yet? [Forget the logistical considerations; it's just as valid a solution from her perspective.]

 

[Bray123]

... against the decision of Israel supported by the US. ...

Therein lies the problem and conceit of the US.

The decision to implement a final solution to the Palestinian problem is horrifying the world. Only the US supports Israel; the UK acted like a Republican Congressman afraid of upsetting Cheeto. Maybe the US should take the hint and reassess which side of history they should be on. Bleating about being betrayed by every single country in the world doesn't sound too serious a position.

 

[Rightguide]

I am surprised to read the news that Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the three member countries of the Five Eyes Alliance issued a joint statement of prime ministers that calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, which is against the decision of Israel supported by the US. And these three countries also voted in favor of the same resolution of the UN assembly, whereas Israel, the US, the UK and other few countries voted against it.
Does that mean the big brother the US has become intolerable and betrayed by his small brothers?
Joint statement of three nations

Maybe somebody has Epstein's black book.

 

[colddiesel]

That's informative information. Thanks for that. It leads me to ask how much those small numbers influence decisions within those countries to have voted on the ceasefire that @gxnn started asking about. Was it about a rise of minority voice concern, or was it a concern for humanity?

It is complicated. Firstly, in OZ 50% of the population was either born overseas or has at least one parent born overseas. The very large immigrant factor tends to be sympathetic to resident migrant problems particularly oppression. Much less sympathetic towards new or would be migrants, currently running at 500,000/year but for economic reasons. Canada has more Moslems, (more than the USA) so has to take notice of their opinions. Both countries are parliamentary democracies so an organised local minority can swing elections from time to time. Similarly in UK minorities are very concentrated, Pakistanis in Bradford or Indians in Leicester for examples.

Jews and Israelis are generally well respected in OZ but we do not have many, only about 120,000 but a 20% increase in the last ten years. Very influential in commerce, academia, law and other spheres, however, the current leadership of the right wing government of Netanyahu in Israel is much less respected.

As noted earlier it is complicated, and opinions tend to be nuanced, and with an over-arching sympathy for the human rights issues on all sides..

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Canada has more Moslems, (more than the USA) so has to take notice of their opinions.

There are more Muslims in Canada than identified Jews.

Both countries are parliamentary democracies so an organised local minority can swing elections from time to time.

True, but that is not the reason for the swing here in Canada. Currently we are under a minority Government, two of the opposition party's demanded the change in policy or else they were going to bring down the government.

 

[gxnn]

I noticed that Gxnn wryly suggested the USA offer a plot of land here to relocate Israel. Young people are so eager to offer advice on solving world problems. Not that I take that as a serious consideration. Why not offer space for them to build on the moon where no one has laid claim on territory yet? [Forget the logistical considerations; it's just as valid a solution from her perspective.]

Actually the idea of relocating Israelis is not mine, but the brainchild of many other warm-hearted netizens around the Internet who find it intolerable to see the endless conflicts between Palestinians and Israelis.

|As the ambitious moon migration, haha,sir, you are really a joker. Since the 1969 moon landing(that unfortunately has been placed in scrutiy for its realness by the Z-generation), nobody has ever repeated such a great accomplishment of humankind. And not everyone is Elon Musk, who can afford such a luxurious trip, even when there is seat available in the space X.

In my opinion, a world leader like the US should have made more sacrifices to its partners, so a plot of no-man's land out of the vast territory is nothing compared with the continous financial and military supports to a long-distance country for a long time. Latest news says the Red Sea is under the real control of the Yemen-based Houthi militants and four major global shipping companies have called a halt of their business in that area, making the situation of giving relief to Israel more difficult if not possible.

 

[ishtat]

Actually the idea of relocating Israelis is not mine, but the brainchild of many other warm-hearted netizens around the Internet who find it intolerable to see the endless conflicts between Palestinians and Israelis.

 

[ishtat]

Actually the idea of relocating Israelis is not mine, but the brainchild of many other warm-hearted netizens around the Internet who find it intolerable to see the endless conflicts between Palestinians and Israelis.

Thank you for the 'like' but somehow my comment was excluded from post number 20 I meant to refer to the work of Stalin who established the Jewish settlement of Birobidzhan far far to the east near to the Chinese border and the 'Ice' city of Harbin in Heilongjiang province. Stalin could not be confused with any warm hearted motives at all, and the settlement was a failure though some 4,000 Yiddish speaking Jews still live there.

 

[dmallord]

Actually the idea of relocating Israelis is not mine, but the brainchild of many other warm-hearted netizens around the Internet who find it intolerable to see the endless conflicts between Palestinians and Israelis.

|As the ambitious moon migration, haha,sir, you are really a joker. Since the 1969 moon landing(that unfortunately has been placed in scrutiy for its realness by the Z-generation), nobody has ever repeated such a great accomplishment of humankind. And not everyone is Elon Musk, who can afford such a luxurious trip, even when there is seat available in the space X.

In my opinion, a world leader like the US should have made more sacrifices to its partners, so a plot of no-man's land out of the vast territory is nothing compared with the continous financial and military supports to a long-distance country for a long time. Latest news says the Red Sea is under the real control of the Yemen-based Houthi militants and four major global shipping companies have called a halt of their business in that area, making the situation of giving relief to Israel more difficult if not possible.

I am not sure I would say those other warm-hearted netizens are all that warm-hearted. Perhaps we should alleviate the issue by offering both parties to the conflict separate slices of the moon. However, neither should have tunnels to one another nor weapons other than perhaps ink pens in their pockets in case the ink in their laptops runs dry. [Yes, I was having a little fun with the moon shot thing. It was light banter.] On a personal note, I was not all that happy with the expenses going into the space programs when I sat glued to the television watching those early launches after Sputnik; so much suffering was experienced here that needed caring for and didn't and still isn't getting it. [I'm not sure my generation has an alphabet letter like the Z-generation; we came well before an alphabet was written.] As you noted, the moon trips were great accomplishments but have not greatly benefited the average person eating rice and beans or rice and fish over generations - and getting Internet access as a concession prize.

Alternatively, if you are friendly with the Chinese government and on good terms, you might consider it a civic and heroic duty and send them an email asking for a suitable plot of Chinese land to relocate those intolerable fighters. China is much larger in area than the USA, far superior in dealing with crowd control, and has plenty of arid locations with extremely spare populations. In the USA, we would have to take votes to designate land, ask citizens to move out of the incoming foreign people's way, and handle all the legal lawsuits of protesters who decided it was their right to stay on their lands for years before solutions worked out. In China, your request could be completed overnight, along with the relocations, if any. China has zillions of cargo containers available for transport. How about giving it the old college try? I know China is working on the island re-acquisition thing - that seems to be going well.

And while you are asking, please ask for a place for the Houthi folks. They need a home, too. And maybe the Iranian radicals? Surely, they should have a place without rockets as well. If I missed a group, go ahead and include them. When that's done, we could go in and bulldoze the ruins left in the aftermath of the war and create large bed and breakfast kind of places to recoup all the costs - maybe a really large DisneyWorld theme park to draw in Chinese tourists and others.

Peace out.

 

[JoePepsiCo]

It's very easy to call for a cease fire when you are thousands of miles away and not in the crosshairs.

Not a particularly brave or noble act which gives me cause to ponder...

Are they terrified of the homegrown retaliation potential?

That would be the action of the coward and ignoble.

This sounds about right to me.