UN sure says a lot of things.
“No shit”, says rest of world.
Maybe if we document it over and over, doing the same thing each time, it’ll be different the next time!!
Why the fuck is OP using quotations?
The UN says its a war crime. Not a “war crime”.
As for OP, they’re trying to follow Rule 4, “post titles should the same as the article used as source.”
As for this publication, International Monitor, likely because they have to use quotes to be appear neutral and not cross various libel/defamation laws. While the UN says it, they could be sued in a country that does not agree.
I don’t disagree that I prefer a publication that doesn’t feel it necessary to hedge their bets behind quotes, but at the same time, not all publications have the resources to “fight the good fight” as it were. They are simply not positioned geographically and financially to be able to put up that fight, unfortunately. I really don’t know if that applies to International Monitor or not, if they’ve got money coming out their ears or aren’t stationed in places it might cause legal issues, they don’t really have a lot of great excuses.
Anyway…
While the UN says it, they could be sued in a country that does not agree.
Do you have any sources for this being done / being even theoretically possible?
You’re right, but it is an inarguable fact that the UN said it is a war crime. They shouldn’t need to hedge it with the “alleged” quotes.
That’s the article title, not OP. What I think they were trying to do was specifically quote the UN’s words in the title, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was an intended double meaning.
Because the article headline - of which the post title is a direct copy - uses quotation marks.
Been a war crime for a few decades now.
Was coming here to express that exact sentiment. None of what Israel is doing is new; it’s just much faster.
“After 70 years of illegal israeli colonization of Palestinian lands, we’ve come to the conclusion that something just isn’t right”.
Does anyone know which law this violates?
Reading through the best I have is collective punishment.
Article 2(4) of Chapter I of the United Nations Charter, which is in force today: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations”.
Reinforced by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2625 (aka Friendly Relations Declaration)
As well as the Rome Statute of the ICC:
Annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof is an act of aggression
And last but not least
The annexation was declared null and void by United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions 252, 267, 271, 298, 465, 476[25] and 478.[26]
Ah, so their war crime was a declaration of war against another UN member?
For goodness’ sake, do something about it then. Stop repeating these same words over and over and over, year after year after year.
Year after year since 1967.
Naw ever since the end of ww2 when the world came together and said fuck the Palestinians we’ll let israel take over.
For sure, but this is specifically about the West Bank and the legal definition of settlements.
Guys. Stop it :(
-Official UN statement.
Your avatar puts the exact sentiment on the statement
They can’t do anything. The only arm of the UN that actually has the power to do anything meaningful here is the Security Council, and so long as the Security Council veto exists the US will just kill anything with actual teeth.
Can’t say or do anything because then it’s anti-semitism.
