H.R. 193- Bill To end membership of the United States in the United Nations

a reply to: neformore

It is new! Because Trump.

a reply to: neformore

Its a brave new world where you only believe what you want. Everything else is fake. The CIA got their wish.

a reply to: karmicecstasy

He's right though, regardless if he or anyone else want it.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: TrueAmerican

I believe that Ron Paul would approve, cant wait to hear his opinion on this.

But if we leave, whos going to veto every resolution against Izrael?

When has the U.N ever enforced any of those resolutions. So why have them at all ?

a reply to: Chadwickus

Never said that he wasn't. Actually implied that he was right.

In the cultural and political environment we have today. Everything is fake if you don't agree with it. So nothing is true. Which means everything is true. Muddled. Obfuscated. It's any intelligence agencies wet dream. But the set up to this environment, was somehow anti-establishment(even though it benefits the establishment by dividing everyone). So people who should know better, eat it all up.

So he is right. But it does not matter. Because people will just choose not to believe.

Brave new world. It sucks. But it seems to be what people THINK they want.

originally posted by: Misterlondon

originally posted by: TrueAmerican

The American Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2017

Ohhhh.... what a nice ring to it it has! I likes it!

We've been the world's police for far too damn long. Regroup, reset, build the wall, concentrate on the USA for a while. And don't screw with us while we make America great again!!! Or else...

World's police!? Don't make me laugh.. more like the world's most war mongering bullies..

with England as the sidekick.

Nationwide legalization of cannabis and establishing it's industry to the fullest potential would generate billions upon billions of dollars for this country. It would be a start at chipping away at that debt and ultimately helping create a sustained healthy economy.

Decisions like that combined with everything else Trump has planned will turn things around in this country.

a reply to: uncommitted

Actually Trump never said that. What Trump did say is NATO countries should not make that assumption if they arent living up to the requirements of the alliance via contributions to it (that are required). NATO and the UN arent the same.

Secondly I dont ever remember Trump discussing Crimea so do you have a link to that? I would like to see what he stated.

a reply to: gladtobehere

No one, I would hope.

The Israeli government have gotten away with far too much, have overreached their "right to self defence" on countless occasions. It will be interesting to see how long its behaviour toward those outside its borders continues to be utterly indefensible, without the backstop of the US veto power.

a reply to: GoShredAK

You are putting to much faith in marijuana sales. They would not come close to to counter balancing the mounting debt. When we tax something the second step would be to decrease spending to reduce the debt. We dont do that... We pass taxes then spend said taxes on anything but debt reduction.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Ironically, and often ignored for various reasons, was Israel offered to return all lands, including Gaza and the west bank in exchange for recognition and peace treaties. Jordan and Egypt agreed. Jordan relinquished control of the west bank to Israel with the caveat it be used for a future Palestinian state (same with Gaza from Egypt). Syria refused, which is why the Golan Heights are still controlled by Israel.

The Palestinans were booted from Jordan back in the day when they decided they would attempt to overthrow the King of Jordan, who in response send military forces into the camps in Jordan and "cleared them out". Israel is not the sole obstacle to a Palestinian state.

Hamas refuses to recognize Israel and their charter calls for its destruction. If you were the leader of a country in the same situation would you allow a state to exist who doesnt recognize your right to exist and who has taken steps to wipe you out?

"Americanism not Globalism will be our credo." President Trump.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I would, in that situation, make use of the impenetrable defence grid that my country had invested in, and actually implement it correctly, so that it did not matter what force or weapon was used against it, because any and all comers would be beaten back, be incapable of penetrating it.

They could do that, and leave everyone, the Palestinians and others, to work the rest out for themselves, while perfectly protected, which would be the only fair thing to do, short of actually helping Palestine set itself up, which would unite the people of Palestine and Israel in a brand new way.

But of course, Israel is run by a government full of murderous, damaged idiots, so that is not going to happen.

Seriously though, they could defend themselves from everything that is thrown at them, without taking a single civilian life in the process. They just do not. The Israeli government have an agenda which has nothing to do with the defence of their people, but everything to do with controlling and damaging Palestinian people, lives and freedoms.

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: uncommitted
First of all, Obama has been busy disarming us...like all good lefties want.... Second to rebuild are military does not mean we have to go to war.

Ah, the fake news begins. How many people were disarmed? What has that to do with withdrawing from the UN?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: uncommitted

Actually Trump never said that. What Trump did say is NATO countries should not make that assumption if they arent living up to the requirements of the alliance via contributions to it (that are required). NATO and the UN arent the same.

Secondly I dont ever remember Trump discussing Crimea so do you have a link to that? I would like to see what he stated.

Agreed NATO and the UN are not the same, but the general rule of the UN is and always has been that if one member state is threatened, then all other member states will respond. Trump appears to be pissed at the UN (mainly America and the UK at that) for making a stance in the UN against the settlement policy in Israel being pushed by his BFF Netanyahu.

For the link, here you go...

www.politico.com...

Globalization is bad. Let's roll back to tribal era. More divided planet is all we need afterall!

a reply to: TrueBrit

So your position is Israel should just allow the attacks and not respond? Again if you were the leader of a country in a similar situation you would just allow the attacks to continue knowing the other groups stated goal is your destruction?

That makes absolutely no logical sense at all. As for the Israeli government do you really think you should be criticizing their actions given you come from the UK, who has a track record just as bad (as well as my country not to mention Hamas, Hezbollah and the other murderous regimes in the ME)?

So long as Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel no 2 state solution is possible. That is not solely israels fault and people need to understand all facts involved.

The fact the UN cant grasp that concept either is further proof of just how useless they are. The whole veto power thing is just as absurd, especially given the differences in moral / ethical standards of various countries.

a reply to: uncommitted

Thats never been a pillar of the UN. The UN charter specifically calls for nations to talk out their differences, using the military solely as a last resort and only in self defense. When the UN takes military action it only authorizes it and calls for member states to use their militaries.

The collective defense doctrine is a pillar of NATO, where an attack on one is an attack on all. The UN does not use that doctrine.

Sure Trump is pissed at the UN however he has nothing to do with the bill in question.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I criticise my own country repeatedly for its behaviour toward other nations, and do not consider my government either current or over the last twenty years, to be properly representative of its people. The fact that there have been repeated marches and protests against the war, from all quarters of British life, should tell you that the government here have no intention of performing as the people would have them do.

As for my position on the Israeli situation, actually it makes perfect sense.

If someone threw a pebble at a castle, would you consider the wiping out of that individuals entire neighborhood just? Because that is the extent of the threat that Hamas ACTUALLY pose to Israel. The Iron Dome system, if correctly installed and fully implemented (which Israel could have done at any time, but chose not to so that attacks on their citizens could potentially succeed, giving them an "excuse" for unreasonably devastating responses), would render Israel the most utterly impenetrable target that has ever existed on this planet.

In such a situation, the more powerful of the players in this situation has a responsibility to be absolutely precise and surgical in its response to threat, but they are not. They flatten districts just to hit single targets, despite being behind the strongest defence cordon that has ever come about in this era. This is like a riot policeman shooting a person dead for striking them with a daffodil.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Hamas is not throwing pebbles at a castle... They are lobbing rockets into civilian targets and are doing so from residential areas in Gaza. Iron dome is not a perfect system and has limitations, especially against smaller size rockets. If your neighbor was lobbing rockets at you I doubt you would allow it to keep occurring.

ALL parties have a responsibility to be precise, including Hamas. That includes not attacking civilians as Hamas does and not launching those attacks from residential areas in order to drive up a civilian body count when the response comes. By the way those 2 actions taken by Hamas are also war crimes.

Israel is not solely to blame.