To ask why the only countries that didn't vote for a ceasefire were USA and UK?

[stillholly]

All other countries in the UN voted for a ceasefire.

USA put their hand up and voted against a ceasefire.

UK abstained from voting.

Can anyone explain to me their reasoning for not voting for a ceasefire?

Tom Fletcher has said that the UK made the wrong call by abstaining and should have voted for a ceasefire instead

Tom Fletcher, who worked as a foreign policy advisor to former PM Gordon Brown, says senior UN officials on the ground have told him "Gaza is becoming a slaughterhouse".

I don't think the USA's requests for restraint are genuine at all.

Remember they killed 10s of 1000s of innocent Iraqi's during the 2nd Gulf war, carpet bombed Vietnam and used chemical weapons on the population.

The end justifies the means for both Israel and the USA.

For what its worth i suspect that there were many countries who voted for a ceasefire or abstained who actually made a tactical vote, knowing that the UK and US would vote no and they wouldn't have to vote no. Everyone knows hamas wont ceasefire, so if Israel does, this is essentially worthless, as it leaves hamas in power. Many countries who voted for a ceasefire want Hamas gone (Egypt) but they don't want to openly say so for various reasons.

There's only 15 members of the Security Council which is the only organ of the UN that can make binding resolutions when it comes to international peace and security.

The other 13 states voted for ceasefire.

I thought all others voted for a ceasefire except UK and USA - hence the question.

Does the Uk and US want rid of all Palestine people?

@ssd I mean people who just want to get on with their lives peacefully being lumped in with the violent antagonists who live amongst them.

*Does the Uk and US want rid of all Palestine people?

don’t be so ridiculous. Just like all palenstinans aren’t Hamas terrorists, not everybody in the U.K. and USA want the same things. Do Palestinians want rid of all Israeli people? If there could be a two state solution agreed today everyone would back it tomorrow. But Hamas and their Middle Eastern arms suppliers don’t want that so Palestinians are dying in the crossfire.

stillholly wrote
"Does the Uk and US want rid of all Palestine people?"

Not really. It's just that the Palestinian people don't appear high up on the list of the UK's and US's priorities.

Israel, and it's preservation as a state at that end of the Med is of far, far greater strategic and economic importance to the west than the Palestinians. Until the Palestinians have Pharma, IT, electronics, an arms industry and politicians favourable to the west, they aren't going to get much support from us. That is the realpolitik of the situation. Sad, but true.

I know you're calling me ridiculous for suggesting that, but really, WHY? Why won't they vote in line with all other countries to allow a ceasefire when so so many innocent civilians men women children and babies are being slaughtered?

I know you're calling me ridiculous for suggesting that, but really, WHY? Why won't they vote in line with all other countries to allow a ceasefire when so so many innocent civilians men women children and babies are being slaughtered?

Because then what? Back to living alongside Hamas, another terror attack, another bombing campaign in retaliation and another call for a ceasefire?

The IDF are currently engaged in an operation to remove Hamas from Gaza. The US is supportive of them completing that operation, with obvious concerns about civilian casualties and other humanitarian impacts.

Also I'm not sure if you're aware but Hamas are continuing to fire rockets into Israel as well.

But @SomeCatFromJapan , do you really think Israel can kill all hamas, surely this continued bombing will actually be producing more recruits to hamas than can be killed ? Isnt that a worry for Israel?

You say they have obvious concerns for civilians and humanitarian relief but how do they have this obvious concern, by taking what action?

Actions speak louder than words, you can say one thing and do another. (Although they probably are.)

Also, I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Isreal army is much larger, financially equipped and has significant more weapons and military vehicles than Hamas.

I'm not personally claiming there are any good solutions here. But I'd imagine that they feel removing Gaza from Hamas control, removing their infrastructure, and killing or capturing as many operatives as possible, is the best option for them.

You say they have obvious concerns for civilians and humanitarian relief but how do they have this obvious concern, by taking what action?

Israel is a sovereign country, it's not in the US remit to take any specific action. They obviously have close ties so will attempt to influence Israel diplomatically.

So why is the US sending rounds of tank ammunition worth 106 million if they have concerns for civilians and humanitarian relief?

You should probably ask Antony Blinken, he'll know better than I.

Just think, if Israel hadn’t been violently and illegally expanding its borders over the past few years and creating a functional prison in Gaza there might have been less poverty, anger and despair and better relations overall in the region. We’ll never know now though, will we?

Exactly this, forget about this all starting on the 7th October, Israel has been dropping bombs on Palestine for YEARS...

It seems to me the US is only really concerned with the way not having any genuine concern about innocent civilians looks, as they have clearly concluded that the only way to rid Gaza of Hamas is to flatten Gaza and kill countless thousands of innocent civilians in the process and have therefore approved the strategy. The US has always been very fond of the term “collateral damage,” after all.

As for, “If there could be a two state solution agreed today everyone would back it tomorrow.” Neither Netenyahu nor Hamas would agree to that - so, get rid of Hamas and you still have a murderous arsehole to get rid of. And whenever Israeli leaders have shown signs of heading towards agreeing to a two state solution, another Israeli assassinates them.

But you said they had obvious concerns, if they were so concerned they wouldn't sell them more weapons or vetoed the ceasefire.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-close-gap-israels-intent-resulting-gaza-death/story?id=105524365

Molymoly, perhaps part of the reason for providing new weapons lies below, in the share prices of our arms manufacturers.

The first value is Feb 11 2022, just prior to Ukraine invasion, the second value are today's prices.

BAE, 601p / 1042p
Rolls Royce 120p / 291p
Qinetiq 268p / 305p
Thales €84/ €137

to name just a few.

It costs the Israelis about $80,000 to shoot down a single $800 Qasam rocket of which there have been thousands fired over the past decade.

War has always been good for business.

The US has an impressive history of getting rid of groups or rulers it doesn’t like and replacing them with something even worse. I’m struggling to see where getting rid of Hamas is going to be any different - unless the real intention is to obliterate an entire region so that nothing can live in it anymore.

There's going to be another vote tomorrow by the UNGA
This one is non binding but for all 193 countries to vote in
It will be interesting to see how each country votes and if the UK abstains again

@quiteoldad Wow, those companies shareholders are making a lot of money.

How can you call it a war when one side has no army, no tanks and no way out. Israel’s actions disgust me to my core. I’ve lost so much faith in humanity, how can anyone flippantly say “that’s what happens in war” when they can clearly see the suffering of thousands that cannot flee to safety. It’s not a war it’s genocide.