UN General Assembly vote

[EndlessWire]

This just goes on and on. I did not get to watch Part Four, but it seems it is finally over. The vote will take place on Wednesday afternoon. It only requires 2/3 of majority to pass. Russia can't veto it. The bill is similar to what Russia vetoed on Friday. There were 120 speeches out of 193 members. Almost every one that I saw condemned Russian aggression.

It won't change anything, but at least we know all the nations that object to this blatant aggression against a country that did not provoke it. Some of the speech givers detailed what their countries had given to the relief efforts ongoing at this time. I think we're pretty up to date on that. It's going to get worse.

I think we learned from WWII. People in the unaffected border countries showed up in their vehicles to assist refugees, just like at Dunkirk. Awfully proud of them.

So, I am going to try to watch the vote tomorrow. If anyone has a brighter idea of what if anything this vote means, please post. I am not a UN expert. Just trying to understand as much as I can.

[DemocraticPatriot]

1. Russia is almost totally isolated from the world community,

as our great president Joe Biden said tonight...

[EndlessWire]

5. Yes

this was good. It won't last, however; maybe just as long as Putin is around. If he has cancer, maybe he can't recover.

What does last are the bereavements caused by Putin. I personally have nothing against Russians. It's Putin, the Duma, and whatever persons are hiding in the shadows. Same with Belarus. Lukashenko has got to go.

[PoliticAverse]

2. You'll get to see who voted NO, who abstains and in the end the resolution will pass...

and The Russian Federation will get a condemnation letter in their permanent record.

[EndlessWire]

3. Oh, TY!

My heart wanted them kicked out, but since that can't happen, at least they get something done to them. If I were being asked to write the letter, they wouldn't like what I would have to say!

[PoliticAverse]

7. The Russian Federation occupies a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council ...

The seat was originally held by the USSR and got passed to The Russian Federation when the USSR broke up. The problem is there was never a formal vote held to pass the seat so there is now some discussion that a vote be held that could remove Russia from its permanent seat but such discussion is still in its early phase.

[EndlessWire]

9. I did hear President Z

explain this very point twice during the UN meetings. He did point this out as being a rule that was being ignored. But, I didn't hear of any further activity regarding this.

The law often asks for just a peg to hang your position on. So, he has made a very valid point which should be followed up on. But, who knows how much all those nations are really pissed, or not. They seemed pissed that they had to come back and spend all this extra time redoing the resolution with a full assembly vote. And, a couple of them have stated that because Russia is voting on a conflict in which it is involved, they should not have the chair. I hope they vote very quickly on it.

Thank you for reminding me of this very important point!

Ukraine,

[PoliticAverse]

12. It was kind of awkward that Russia occupied the Presidency of the Security Council

during the Council's discussion of this issue but it is March now and the U.A.E. now occupies the Security Council Presidency.

[hippywife]

18. Which might also be interesting...

as UAE abstained on the first vote.

[SergeStorms]

4. Couldn't the U.N. declare a "no fly zone" over Ukraine?

Asking for about 43 million friends.

[EndlessWire]

6. Apparently, we have said NO.

It would require military aircraft, and would draw us into the war. For the US (not speaking for the UN), we just got out of Afghanistan. It may be strategically better to hold them off while supplying Ukraine fighters with equipment. Ukraine did receive really good aircraft, which they have already picked up. They are receiving Baltic Sea support from Germany.

The Ukrainians are uniquely fierce fighters. Who would have thought that they would mount such a resistance. They can do a lot with the aircraft. Maybe, they need to create a no-fly zone on their own. We could send them more aircraft. The aircraft then become theirs, and we are not on the hook with troops.

If Putin were stupid enough to misinterpret this, and attack NATO, then we would be in it. At that point, it would already be a WW. I don't think we would wait very long at all to join the fray.

[PoliticAverse]

8. The U.N. could take military action as it did when North Korea invaded South Korea but there doesn't

seem to be any consensus for that as few want to escalate a war with a country that possesses nuclear weapons.

[SergeStorms]

10. So the U.N. will sit by....

while innocent Ukrainians are slaughtered by the Moscow Madman.

OK, that makes sense.

[blogslug]

11. No-Fly zones require enforcement

Enforcement means shooting down Russian planes.

[SergeStorms]

19. Then why does the U.N. have peacekeeping forces?

What the hell good is the U.N.?

We have these organizations which supposedly exist to keep madmen like Putin from doing exactly what he's doing.

Then everyone sits idly by while Ukrainian citizens are slaughtered. When do we say, enough! When there are no more Ukrainians to slaughter? When Putin gets bored of killing? When Ukraine is bombed until it's good for nothing but a parking lot?

Don't bother replying. It's nothing you've done or said, and I know you don't have the answers. I'm just venting. I'm questioning an entire system that can allow something like this to go on, and do absolutely nothing about it. It's maddening.


Thanks, and have a great day.

[EndlessWire]

13. I think we are trying out

a new style of warfare. If this works, it would be a hopeful new way to keep aggression in check. But, with NK receiving fuel at sea, circumventing such sanctions, I just don't think it will work on Russia, either. I have enjoyed reading about all the countries and what they are doing, but the real problem is the presence of Putin and Lukashenko. G-d help us, we need the Russian people to get rid of Putin their own selves. They can't sit there and expect the rest of the world to do their job for them.

If Putin is not stopped, the problem with just reoccur. We'll have to go back. If I were the world, I'd be infiltrating like crazy.

[PoliticAverse]

14. I think the only long term solution to the current problem requires a change in the Russian

government.

[Backseat Driver]

15. It won't make your angst any easier, but try these links to

understand or to find meaning in the proceedings and upcoming UN General Assembly vote:

https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/role-of-general-assembly

[snip]In accordance with the General Assembly's "Uniting for Peace" resolution of November 1950 [resolution 377 (V)], if the Security Council fails to act, owing to the negative vote of a permanent member, then the General Assembly may act. This would happen in the case where there appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression. The General Assembly can consider the matter with a view to making recommendations to Members for collective measures to maintain or restore international peace and security.

This resolution was invoked only once in UN peacekeeping history, when in 1956 the General Assembly established the First UN Emergency Force (UNEF I) in the Middle East. Here's that history:
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/services/military-history/history-heritage/past-operations/middle-east/united-nations-emergency-force-i.html

The who-is-who leadership of the Peacekeeper arm of the UN and their credentials: https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/leadership

More about this unusual UN General Assembly vote from MSM: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/united-nations-russia-ukraine_n_621c71a4e4b0afc668c2b418
===============================================================II'll try to be following this upcoming vote and what it more fully means in light of the sanctions President Biden has installed to financially isolate him, et al, between the "rock and the hard place" o their hubris along with other world nations. Perhaps this group will find the funding for defense and humanitarian supplies in neighboring (NATO) nations that have received war refugees. Good grief, I heard about a push on Moldova by Belarus??? - Moldova's evidently one messed up country in terms of ethnicities and ideologies, that is next to be embraced illegally by Putin's raging/twisted tzarist pipe dreams of Russia's nevermore-to-be-reconstituted boundaries while fancying himself an empirical Romanov. Being one of the New Century's monsters on steroids is his idea of moving forward out of the past? What a legacy - Glory to Ukraine and all those in favor of freedom to live in peace. - SMH

[EndlessWire]

16. TY. Going to read it tomorrow. n/t

[hippywife]

17. I watched the whole thing today.

Only 4 countries spoke against it: Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and N. Korea. No surprises.