|
chidichris (m)
|
4 play and others here who have been insulted in one way or the other, i sincerely regret the feelings and share that with u but i would like to remind each an everyone of us here that we are in a public place and in places like this, we are bound to meet different people of different ages and understandings. we are not surposed to be surprised with people's reactions and it is possible that if some of us meet others in person, we will have no bases to argue with them so internet per say is removing that class as phd holders and primary school drop-outs can argue here and u can imagine what that will look like.
like i said before, a typical iran man will not be happy with u for addressing him as an arab. iran threathened to boycout doha 2006 games organised by qatar simply because in the advertisement, the so called persian golf( sea) was addressed as arabian golf.
the problem of the region today could be traced to have passed beyond isreali - palestine. look at the fatah-hamas problems of late, see hezeboula versus lebanese president. check out the sunnis and the shiites. if we want to discuss un resolutions here, then all these groups have no place in the un since they are widely reffered as terrorist groups.
if we want to talk about solutions and someone is calling for 1968 boarders, i think the person is representing a different interest as the hamas and other anti-isreali factions are demanding for total withdrawal. from all angles of it one can even see that the problem has gone beyond the lands and boarders especially now the new call is for " wipe out" and with such word, a man in his right senses is saying iranian president is the wisest president in the world. elections held a couple of days back is showing that the much acclaimed wise man is loosing seats in his first ever electyion since his assumption of office.
if we have age brackets in nairaland, it will always be easy for people to know where they belong
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@4 play,
It is obvious that even if the UN decides to give you a list of what it thinks amounts to UN Security Council resolutions that Israel has gone against you will still find a way of educating them on how they should interpret their own documents.
I guess this is all I have to say to you on this. I did present a link that contained many documents, categorized by years with many references to the Sec Councils resolutions on the Israeli Palestine issue. When you are less busy, take time to go through them and stop this idea of even calling black white simply because you prefer it to be white.
@David Adenuga,
At 22 years, you should have received proper home training (assuming those responsible for that played their parts well) that would make you to focus any issues you may have with anyone without refering to the person's parents or grandparents.
Focus on your free education lest you lose out both ways.
@mrpataki,
I have seen dogs like you before who will insult someone and turn the insult to joke when the insult is returned.
So, you are shamelessly stating that your insult was a joke yet you have refused to accord my own insults (as a direct response in kind) the same twisted explanations.
@Donzman,
What can one do than to continue to present information based on facts and let those that belief they have a right to insult others when they disagree with them continue to do so.
What is really disgusting about this is that those who start the insults are the first to complain about insults, what silly hypocrisy is this?
I have never insulted anyone here unless I am replying a direct insult (even though some are now claiming that their insults are mere jokes) and I have every right to return such insults when they come.
I am at home with the fact that only those that find it difficult to make their points will resort to insults in the first place and it is a big relief to see people play out this simple fact.
@Topic,
I remember stating that Israel collects taxes on behalf of Palestine and such taxes have been withheld since Hamas came to power.
To this correct statement, our intelligent David Adenuga stated that I should stop making bogus statements that are lies.
Anyone following the news today must have heard that Israel has agreed to release taxes that were seized that rightly belonged to Palestine as some of the criminal artificial conditions have made it possible for a country to collect taxes on behalf of another even when the area concerned belongs to Palestine.
You see why I keep advicing this 22 yr old to face his studies. Anything he is not aware of automatically becomes a lie and even in the ignorance displayed insults are thown at the person making statements that don't exist in his small world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
@Afam
You cannot argue against basic legal principles.
Nothing I said about the non-binding effects of Cap 6 Resolutions is my personal opinion ,this instead is enshrined in the UN Charter.
You cannot cite a series of Resolutions that are intended to be non-binding as proof of Isreal's International law obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donzman (m)
|
What good is a resolution if it is expected to be non-binding?, Why even bother to pass it all, does that even make a sense?  |
|
|
|
|
|
shango (m)
|
4 Play so Un resolutions are non binding now? How can we even debate when you start to redefine well established facts
Donzman thanks for pointing that out. I guess the UN just passes resolutions for passing sake.
ok. What about the original British mandate establishing Israel and Palestine and setting the borders for both states. Israel has since expanded its boarders and setup new settlements. Or is the original mandate setting up Israel as a jewish state non binding as well (which would mean Israel is "non-binding" and has no right or basis to exist)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@Donzman & Shango,
Abeg, make una helep me explain to this man, the way and manner he twists very estabilshed facts and principles amazes me.
The other time he stated that the US was not under any obligation to obey the UN security council when it was clear the US and Britain (2 out of 5 permanent members) could not get a resolution to attack Iraq.
Well, what can one do but to continue to provide information based on facts and let those of us that believe we must interprete things based on what we like and not what they should be.
We are all witnesses to the current issues making news today, how do we see them? Can many of us claim to be objective and sincere in their analysis? Why apply double standards just to prove a point no matter how bad such a point is.
The Haditha massacre
The US military has charged 4 for unpremedidated murder after knowingly killing civilians including children, men, a grand mother and women.
After a road side bomb hit a humvee the soldiers went on a killing spree and instead reported that 15 Iraqi civilians died in the roadside bomb when in fact they killed a total of 24 civilians in cold blood.
Now you wonder how Iraqis related to this people will look the soldiers in the eyes and praise them for killing thei own, in cold blood.
Religous bigotry
A US law maker is challenging the decision of a muslim (the first democractically elected representative) to use the quran in his swearing in ceremony even though many have used both the bible or the Jewish holy book in theirs.
I wonder if the muslim should use a bible for his swearing in ceremony even though he isn't a christian.
The law maker also adviced that strict immigration laws be enacted lest the US sees more elected muslims that will also demand the use of the quran.
It is funny to imagine that someone who traces his lineage to invaders that massacred innocent native and original inhabitants of the US and forcefully took their lands.
Democracy and Iran
How time flies. Today, many are reporting that opponents of the Iranian president are winning seats. That is good for democracy and Iran has been a democracy for quite some time even though the Western media would prefer not to tell the world that.
The president won a free and fair election and in fact his campaign was based on a die hard stand against the West and his people voted for him just as Hamas was overwhemingly voted into power by the Palestinians even though they all knew everything about Hamas.
My point is that we should learn to keep unnecessary sentiments at home when discussing certain issues on public fora as we may be displaying ignorance, bigotry, double standards, hypocrisy and sometimes outright lies.
I am certain (based on analysis and submissions here) that some commentators here would claim that Iran isn't practicing democracy if the president's opponents were losing just as the average political opponent will blame rigging for any losses in elections.
We should be able to display a certain reasonable level of objectivity lest we commit worse crimes than the people we may be criticing for whatever reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
@Sango I suggested in my last post that it might be advisable before u put up a post on UN Security Council Resolutions,that u should do some basic research on it,apparently u have not. Article 10 of the UN Charter states specifically that General Assembly Resolutions are not binding .But hey,maybe u guys know better than the framers of the UN Charter As for Chapter 6 Resolutions,please check out under the "NOTES",a compendium of statements on the non-binding nature of such resolutions- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_478Sango,do u still think that my posts on Cap 6 Resolutions go against what u called "well established facts",but then maybe u know better about International Law than the experts My irritation is towards the lack of humility on your part.It was quite clear from the moment I read your post that u were not conversant with the the inner workings of the UN ,hence I advised u to research on the topic which obviously u failed to do. Resolutions passed on the Arab/Israel conflict have been mostly General Assembly and Cap 6 Resolutions except for Resolution 338 which stipulates that 242 shall be binding.I have already expressed my opinion on 242. The legality of the State of Isreal is already well established,Isreal being a member of the UN Yes Sango,in many senses the UN just passes Resolutions for "passing sake",it is odd but that is the way it operates. |
|
|
|
|
|
mrpataki (m)
|
@ Afam,
I can now most definitely see that you are a great dwarf in your line of reasoning and thought patterns. As much as i dont want to digress from the topic, your dogmatic vituperations could not go without an adequate response from me.
Listen here, you cheap swine and attention seeker, if the language of expressing your points is by verbal vilify, dont ever try it with me!
Guess you are just too silly to know what a sense of humor is, with a little word of seriousness! What an arrogant and egoistical idiot!
@ 4Play
Maybe you need to let them know what it means when it is said in legal terms as: It is legal but not binding!
Then idiots like afam, could get a grasp of what you are trying to say here. He is too full of stupidity to have a clearer understanding of issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
chrisagabs (f)
|
pls can u give any information on the recent airforce short service test? Have they shortlisted people for the interview?
|
|
|
|
|
|
chidichris (m)
|
Afam,
sometimes u seat back read without partial attention. there is what we call hallow effect in pshycology and when one has thie hallow effect, it blocks your mind from the normal way of understanding an issue.
america was attacked on sept 11 2001, could u please tell us on whose resolution the attackers did that.
saddam invaded kuwait and listed other countries in the region that will follow after kuwait and the region in fear called for american's intervention but along the line un stopped the war and asked iraq to open its doors for weapon inspectors to see.
the lasted between 1990 and 2003 when bush felt the threat is still there as long as the beast was still on seat. since he defied un resolution for over 13 years and nothing has been done what other reasons will us give for him to be attacked.
it may please u to know that un yesterday voted unanimously against iran and sanctions have been placed on your wisest man.
at least this will solidfy your stance as to convience all of us here that in the present life we are living the iran president is the only wise man among fool hence the sanction.
afam, unfortunately i do not know your age but my advise here is that u grow up.
iranians are not happy with his mannerless speeches but unfortunately iran is not like nigeria where we can always say what we want.
nobody in iran can write what we write here on nairaland. there is no orji uzor kalu, gani, kayomo, soyinka or former oshomole there yet that is your ideal state.
the people of iran are living their lives in fear and the hands of liberation is very far from them and of late they are running out of iran and come to dubai u will speak with them and u know what it means to be under the kind of leadership they are in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
Its important to note that the Resolution passed against Iran,like the many Resolutions against Iraq,is under Chapter 7
I don't think many people appreciate that Iran is a dictatorship and that the elections conducted there are largely a facade since real power resides with the Spiritual Leader.
Also most members of the reformist groups are banned from even contesting
|
|
|
|
|
|
davidylan (m)
|
Ahmadinejad rejects UN sanctions
Iran's president has rejected UN Security Council sanctions against Tehran, insisting his country would press ahead with its nuclear programme.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the resolution passed on Saturday was a "piece of paper" adding that the 15 countries who voted in favour would regret it.
Iran has said it will begin installing 3,000 centrifuges at a uranium enrichment plant at Natanz on Sunday.
The sanctions ban nuclear trade with Iran, but the US wants tougher curbs.
Mr Ahmadinejad said the West had lost its chance to improve relations with Iran.
Iran is now an established nuclear state and it is in [the West's] interest to live along the Iranian nation
I thought Isreal was the ONLY state that "violated" UN resolutions!
|
|
|
|
|
|
chidichris (m)
|
the man is just bragging because among other countries, isreal will not allow that. Isreal has since mounthed a satelite to monitor their nuclear sites and will burst without notice as soon as they sense danger.
the world is afraid of what will result from isreal attacking iran.
if u watch the leadership of iran, u will find out that is not even the president talking rather the spiritual leader. he is the mentor and the founder and till date his pictures are pasted all the streets of iran.
there is no such forum like nairaland in iran and there is no anti - government press allowed in iran. even the worst military leader in nigeria gave room for the press to say their minds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@chidichris,
Please, try to organise your thoughts before putting them down on a public forum, I don't have the time to solve puzzles all in the name of reading through your incoherent posts.
@mrpataki,
So it is now a question of sense of humour? I have heard dogs say the same thing when put in the same position you are in right now.
You abused me, I responded in kind, you turned around and stated you were joking.
Now, it's a case of sense of humour, you really know no shame. Why don't you take my responses in kind they way you take yours? If you can converted your insults to jokes then feel free to convert mine to jokes too.
I prefer and respect people that will be bold enough to insult others and stand by the insults rather than snakes like you that will insult people and deny them once they are insulted by way of a response in kind.
@ 4 Play,
You are only introducing the issue of General Assembly Resolutions to confuse issues, I am sure that Security Council resolutions have the main crux of the matter since the issue of Israel going against them came to the fore.
Why bother to make simple issue look complex?
Point of correction, democracy is alive and well in Iran, the president came to power through a free and fair election based on his hardline stand against the West. Same way Hamas won a landslide in a free and fair election unless you have a personal standard you use in determining what a democracy is in your books.
On Iran's rejection of the UN Security Council resolution
The world may not have any rights under the sun to question Iran if Iran carries out its threat to withdraw from the NPT which by the way is voluntary.
Today, Israel, India & Pakistan are not signatories to the NPT, that means that these countries can develop as many nuclear weapons as they want without anyone having the right to question it.
Should Iran choose to withdraw the scenario will change and no one will have the right to question it as regards nuclear technology and nuclear weapons.
Now, what moral right or justifications do some nations have over others concerning development of nuclear weapons when they continue to develop them and use such status to bargain or force their ways in the world affairs today?
My position is that no nation should be allowed to develop or own nuclear weapons for whatever reasons whatsoever.
However, if one country feels it should develop and one them, then I do not see any reasons why others will not want to do the same.
On the issue of Iran disobeying UN Security Council resolution, I do not believe anyone here has remotely implied that only Israel has gone against the UN Security Coucil resolution. Iran has rejected it, just like some nations have rejected some in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
|
gbade. x (m)
|
@Afam:
cool off, will ya? What's with you and flame throwing and disses in different threads? Like chidichris once said, spit yo' game and leave it at that, no need for semen-spewing.
Let's all be civil, aight?
Back to the topic and excreta:
i believe if firearms and weapons are laid aside by both parties, there could be meaningful dialogue progressing towards peace. Another is that, the state of Israel and Palestine can be neighbours, and both can co-exist peacefully.
There should also be another that states that the first mofo to chicken out should be made accountable for such breach of peace and tolerance and sanctions of a kind should be placed on them.
Having said all this, i must say that solutions to the Mid-east crisis are far remote and peace btw the Arabs and Israelis is sadly and unfortunately more or less idealism rather than reality. Most times, we think of what should be, wallowing in fantasies, but don't face what it is. Like one man said, "As far as there are gonna be sick unhappy people in the Middle East, the situation over there would continue to be sick and unhappy"
take a cue from that.
Inbtw,
Ahmedhinajad is a silly muthafucka consumed with his hatred for Jews that has his head far up his backside and like many of his kind, reasons from the rear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
@ 4 Play,
You are only introducing the issue of General Assembly Resolutions to confuse issues, I am sure that Security Council resolutions have the main crux of the matter since the issue of Israel going against them came to the fore.
@Afam Did u actually bother to read the link I put up?That link shows that the Security Council Resolutions passed against I sreal were passed under Cap 6,the link then shows that Cap 6 Resolutions are non-binding. My earlier post contains only one line on General Assembly Resolutions and most of the post was on the effect of Security Council Resolutions under Cap 6. U seem to be one of those who will never admit that they are wrong.U made fun of my earlier suggestions that cap 6 Security council Resolutions are non-binding,when I now gave u a link containing statements on the non-binding effect of such Resolutions,your response was to complain that I am trying to confuse the issues The confusion u are experiencing is due to your pre-conceived beliefs running into factual evidence of the invalidity of your beliefs,instead of acknowledging your error,u carry on explaining away your erroneous positions Once again,check out the position of experts on the non-binding effect of cap 6 Security Council Resolutions under the "Notes "- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_478I am awaiting your excuses.Remember u said I was arguing against "well established facts" by stating that cap 6 security Council Rsolutions are non-binding NB:The Security Council Resolutions on Isreal were passed under Cap 6,those against Iran were under Cap 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
chidichris (m)
|
it is very unfortunate that we are not discussing or tackling the right issue here. it is either we are deep in our love or hatred for a party in the crisis or we are out to insult ourselves.
in honouring any agreement, there are always a pre-condition. in the first place, hamas and her alieds are calling for isreal's total withdrawal while the major un resolution is calling for co-existance. Abbas is working towards a peaceful resolution which will see both states exist along side each other but hamas sees him as a betrayal as voilence is always their watchword. Abbas met with isreali prime minister a couple of days back and their meeting was productive as isreal was able to release up to us$100 million for the running of the palestine governement.
in lebanon, the un resolution is the hezeboulah be disarmed and other conditions will follow suit. who is saying item 1 should not be treated before item 2?
we are all aware here that palestine militarily are far less than isreal. we are also aware that the possibility of a total withdrawal is as good as the possibilities of wipping isreal out of map as the iranian president demands.
we want a realistic solution. Afam, i plead that u drop your arms here as say in a plain language what u think is the solution to the isreali/palestine conflict.
in my words, i still believe that voilence has done more harms than good hence i say peaceful resolution which must be a product of dialogue aim at the peaceful co-existance of the tow states.
if palestine lost their boarders in the course of loosing a war, i still believe they are still handicapped for a re-take via voilence let peace be the watchword here.
Afam, if you are talking politics and democracy, then you have to accept the fact that Gaddafi who is the president of libya till date is there by most times 100%(that is democracy) robert mugabe is the president of zimbabwe and is he is there by democracy( 100% votes), our own Abacha had the mandate of the people despite been a military man as was reflected by the various abacha continue campeigns and the abuja two million man match in support of his stay in power, Saddam hussien had 100% in all elections during his time in power and tht is democracy.
if iran has democray, were is the freedom of their press and how does or where does democracy exist without oposition?
Idi Amin of Uganda, Jomo Kenyata of kenya charles taylor of liberia, iyadima of togo are all remembered today for their democrartic leadership in their various countries.
we are the faith and hope of africa, we have to call a spade a spade whenever we see one.
i would like to reffer eah and every one of us here to watch the movie called Flight 93. put urself in the shoes of the passangers on board or see urself a a member of their family. see urself talking to your loved one who i on a death roll. u can as well think of u been in th world trade centre on sept. 11, 2001. or believe that the bread winner of your family was there. think about the shock and after effects of the incident and then wake up one morning to call those terrorists heros.
we want a voilent free societ where dialogue will always be the watch word as we do not know who the next victime will be. it could be me or u
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@gbade,
If you must advice others do so in an objective manner, no one has any right to ask me not to reply insults in kind.
I believe the appropriate thing to do is advice those who cannot disagree with others without insulting them to stop doing so, not asking those who only reply in kind not to do so, that is plain bias and I am not the type that allows idiots insult others only to start complaining when you return the insults.
@4 Play,
I am only glad that other people have pointed out how far you are willing to go to confuse very clear issues.
One aptly put it thus; of what use are UN Security Council Resolutions if they are not binding on the nations? Suddenly wikipedia is now a source of information that you can trust, wonders shall never end.
The issues are clear, keep playing with words, the message is clear, I have since stopped attempting to explain very clear issues especially with you.
@chidichris,
As long as you keep making references to insults when you are not bold enough to admit that you started it then you don't deserve more than a few lines from me.
I hate with passion people who deny what they do and people who lie without shame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
@Afam
Since i posted the link ,u are the only person still foolhardedly claiming that Cap 6 Resolutions are binding
U remind me of the members of the flat earth society,no matter the evidence presented before them,they still insist the earth is flat
Perhaps u should read the Cap VI and VII of the UN Charter for yourself,knowing u however,u will read it,shake your head and proclaim that u disagree with it
UN Charter stipulates that only non binding recommendations can be made under Cap 6,but hey what authority does the UN Charter have compared to your authority to dismiss decades of legal principles .
Perhaps people should stop looking at the UN Charter for guidance on International Law and start reading your posts on Nairaland
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@4 Play, I had thought that issues concerning UN Security Councils Resolutions would have been appropriately dealt with or clarifications sought on the UN website rather than a free online encyclopedia that can be edited by anyone. http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions.html has a nice list of all major UN Security Council Resolutions and I did advice you to read the site up at your leisure, I guess you did not. Now, even from your free encyclopedia source the complete content is reproduced below and I wonder if you imagined that the content actually helps your position on Israel going against the world as regards the UN Security Council Resolution or harms it. ============================================================= United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 declared that the 1980 Knesset law (the "Jerusalem Law") declaring Jerusalem as Israel's "eternal and indivisible" capital was "null and void and must be rescinded forthwith". This resolution, not taken under chapter VII of the charter (the binding chapter[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] ), advised member states to withdraw their diplomatic representation from the city as a punitive measure. Most nations with embassies in Jerusalem complied, and relocated their embassies to Tel Aviv prior to the adoption of Resolution 478. Following the withdrawals of Costa Rica and El Salvador in August 2006, no country maintains its embassy in Jerusalem, although Paraguay and Bolivia have theirs in nearby Mevasseret Zion. [1] The United States Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995, stating that "Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel; and the United States Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem no later than May 31, 1999. As a result of the Embassy Act, official U.S. documents and web sites refer to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The embassy itself still did not move pending the agreement of the President. The vote on the resolution, which took place on August 20, 1980, was passed 14-0, with the United States abstaining. ======================================================================= And the notes section, I hope you realise that I can edit the document and add my own note below with any information I may deem fit, however, the point is that in terms of factual information, the website of the UN is a far more reliable source when compared to a free online encyclopedia that even you can edit. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Notes 1. ^ "Additionally it may be noted that the Security Council cannot adopt binding decisions under Chapter VI of the Charter" (De Hoogh, Andre. Obligations Erga Omnes and International Crimes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1996, p. 371). 2. ^ "Council recommendations under Chapter VI are generally accepted as not being legally binding". (Magliveras, Konstantinos D. Exclusion from Participation in International Organisations, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1999, p. 113). 3. ^ "Within the framework of Chapter VI the SC has at its disposal an 'escalation ladder' composed of several 'rungs' of wielding influence on the conflicting parties in order to move them toward a pacific solution, however, the pressure exerted by the Council in the context of this Chapter is restricted to non-binding recommendations". (Neuhold, Hanspeter. "The United Nations System for the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes", in Cede, Franz & Sucharipa-Behrmann, Lilly. The United Nations, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 2001, p. 66). 4. ^ "The responsibility of the Council with regard to international peace and security is specified in Chapters VI and VII. Chapter VI, entitled 'Pacific Settlements of Disputes', provides for action by the Council in case of international disputes or situations which do not (yet) post a threat to international peace and security. Herein its powers generally confined to making recommendations, the Council can generally not issue binding decisions under Chapter VI". (Schweigman, David. The Authority of the Security Council Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 2001, p. 33). 5. ^ "Under Chapter VI, the Security Council may only make recommendations but not binding decisions on United Nations members". (Wallace-Bruce, Nii Lante. The Settlement of International Disputes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1998, pp. 47-4 ). 6. ^ "The UN distinguishes between two sorts of Security Council resolution. Those passed under Chapter Six deal with the peaceful resolution of disputes and entitle the council to make non-binding recommendations. Those under Chapter Seven give the council broad powers to take action, including warlike action, to deal with “threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, or acts of aggression”. Such resolutions, binding on all UN members, were rare during the cold war. But they were used against Iraq after its invasion of Kuwait. None of the resolutions relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict comes under Chapter Seven." Iraq, Israel and the United Nations: Double standards?, The Economist, October 10, 2002. 7. ^ "There are two sorts of security council resolution: those under 'chapter 6' are non-binding recommendations dealing with the peaceful resolution of disputes; those under 'chapter 7' give the council broad powers, including war, to deal with 'threats to the peace , or acts of aggression'." Emmott, Bill. If Saddam steps out of line we must go straight to war, The Guardian, November 25, 2002. 8. ^ ", there is a difference between the Security Council resolutions that Israel breaches (nonbinding recommendations under Chapter 6) and those Iraq broke (enforcement actions under Chapter 7)." Kristof, Nicholas D. Calling the Kettle Black, The New York Times, February 25, 2004. 9. ^ "There is a hierarchy of resolutions, Chapter 6, under which all resolutions relating to the middle east have been issued, relates to the pacific resolution of disputes. Above that, there are the mandatory chapter 7 resolutions, which impose the clearest possible obligations, usually on a single state rather than on two or three states, which is what chapter 6 is there for. Chapter 7 imposes mandatory obligations on states that are completely out of line with international law and policy, and the United Nations has decided in its charter that the failure to meet those obligations may be met by the use of force." Straw, Jack. House of Commons debates, Hansard, Column 32, September 24, 2002. 10. ^ "There is another characteristic of these resolutions which deserves a mention, and that is that they are under chapter 7 of the United Nations charter. Chapter 7 has as its heading 'Action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression'. This is the very serious chapter of United Nations rules, regulations, laws and principles, which the United Nations activates when they intend to do something about it. If the United Nations announces under chapter 7 that it intends to do something about a matter and it is not done, that will undermine the authority of the United Nations; that will render it ineffective. There are many other resolutions under other chapters. Resolution 242 gets a bit of a Guernsey here every now and then. Resolution 242 is under chapter 6, not chapter 7. It does not carry the same mandate and authority that chapter 7 carries. Chapter 6 is the United Nations trying to put up resolutions which might help the process of peace and it states matters of principle that are important for the world to take into consideration. Resolution 242 says that Israel should withdraw from territories that it has occupied. It also says that Israel should withdraw to secure and recognised boundaries and that the one is dependent upon the other. Resolution 242 says that, but it is not a chapter 7 resolution." Beazley, Kim, Waiting for blow-back (speech delivered in Parliament on February 4, 2003, The Sydney Morning Herald, February 5, 2003. 11. ^ "There are several types of resolutions: Chapter 6 resolutions are decisions pursing the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, and put forward Council proposals on negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies, and other peaceful means. Chapter 7 resolutions are decisions for Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, involving use of force and sanctions, complete or partial interruption of economic relations, rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic radio and other means of communication and the severance of diplomatic relations. Resolutions passed under Chapter 7 of the Charter are binding on all UN members, who are required to give every assistance to any action taken by the Council, and refrain from giving any assistance to the country against which it is taking enforcement action." Iran dossier crosses the Atlantic: Where to from here? (Microsoft Word document), Greenpeace position paper on Iran. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Do yourself a favour and say things the way they are. When you try to make simple things complex you end up making people question your real motive. |
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
@Afam Perhaps I overestimated your powers of comprehension What relevance is the UN website link of UN Security Resolutions,such as the one u posted,when the bone of contention between us is the Legal status of those resolutions? To refresh your memory,the question between us is,whether any such Security Council resolutions create binding international law
1. ^ "Additionally it may be noted that the Security Council cannot adopt binding decisions under Chapter VI of the Charter" (De Hoogh, Andre. Obligations Erga Omnes and International Crimes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1996, p. 371).
5. ^ "Under Chapter VI, the Security Council may only make recommendations but not binding decisions on United Nations members". (Wallace-Bruce, Nii Lante. The Settlement of International Disputes, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Jan 1, 1998, pp. 47-4 ).
The above quotes are relevant to our debate.U can easily find them in the pages of the textbooks mentioned above to satisfy you that they were not added by the author of the wikipedia post. i told u earlier that resolutions on the Isreali/Arab conflict were almost exclusively under Cap 6 (including Resolution 478 which began the wikipedia post) and as such they were not binding, u said that was contrary to "established facts". The question is not whether there exists SECURITY Council Resolutions on the conflict, the question is are they binding given the fact that they are made under Cap 6 of the UN Charter? Your reasoning or the lack of it is worthy of membership of the flat earth society |
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@4Play,
I agree you overestimated my powers of comprehension, coming from you it's a compliment, nothing I should lose sleep ove.
My reasoning or lack of it may be worthy of membership of the flat earth society, it does not matter but dancing around words and attempting to make simple things complex seems a weakness rather than a strenght.
I have delibrately not bothered to reply you sly remarks in kind because you are providing ample content to show what you stand for and what you want to push through even in the face of clarity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mariory (m)
|
^ ^ LOL. Simply unbelievable. @4 Play Hang in there. It appears to be a huge task to educate him but, he can't keep running round in cirlces. Eventually, somehow, something will light up upstairs.  |
|
|
|
|
|
mrpataki (m)
|
@ Mariory, Hope he does not come all out to tear you to pieces, all i can see out here is a mad dog on the loose! Just becareful anyhow  |
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
@Afam @4Play,
I agree you overestimated my powers of comprehension, coming from you it's a compliment, nothing I should lose sleep ove.
My reasoning or lack of it may be worthy of membership of the flat earth society, it does not matter but dancing around words and attempting to make simple things complex seems a weakness rather than a strenght.
I have delibrately not bothered to reply you sly remarks in kind because you are providing ample content to show what you stand for and what you want to push through even in the face of clarity.
No where in this forum have u stated why u think that Cap 6 Resolutions are binding despite the provisions of the UN Charter to the contrary and the opinion of legal experts. U are incredibly ignorant of the topic u post on but self pride will not let u admit that u may be wrong |
|
|
|
|
|
shango (m)
|
so what International law established Israel as a legitimate state, says it can build a wall around itself and expand its borders indefinately while laying land mines on its borders and the borders of its neighbors.
Why are we discussing International law like Israel actually FOLLOWS any International laws. Israel does whatever the mess it wants with US backing.
Not to mention any laws passed against Israel by the UN are vetoed by the US. But ofcourse 4play left that out in his discussion of UN resolutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
@Shango,
I really do wonder why people are afraid of truth and are willing to go any lenght to twist very clear issues.
@4Play,
I may be ignorant but I do not tell lies to support my positions neither do I twist issues.
Just yesterday you made a bold but very false statement that the US is a voluntary union even when it fought bitter wars to annex countries in the north and in the south.
I am really losing count of how many times you have been wrong on this forum and I won't play the this game of international law, cap 6, cap 7, legally binding etc because it seems you are looking for a cheap way out of your wrong analysis based on incorrect premises and assumptions.
This forum is not a substitute for real education, it is your duty to learn what you do not know, not the duty of other posters here.
For those learning how to throw insults, I am kind of busy right now and will respond when you are able to package your insults well, for now, they are like those packaged by mentally deranged people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
chidichris (m)
|
Shango, it is nice you are out to back the one and only afam. if you are asking about laws that allow isreal a right to exist then you are calling for their wipe out as the iranian president is doing. how on earth are u asking the law that establish isreal as a legal state? wonders. anyway, in the laws of un countries have right to self defence from external agression. if nigeria today decides to use bibed wires to guide its boarders, it will be allowed as long as it does not affect the comfort of her neighbours.
are you not aware of the boarders of spains and morocco. if u do watch cnn and bbc, u will not ask why. are u not aware that a man sourrounded by enemies always watch over his life. berlin wall was there to seperate the two germans untill they agreed on unity again.
i want to believe u asked these question because u want to know not that u want to argue like our able afam.
every un member has legal rights to exist as well as legal rights to self defence.
for iran, their law makers have finally passed a bill asking the president to shift his ground and accept the un resolution over urenium enrichment and remember no country can exist alone no matter how rich and powerful it may seem.
afam,
you were contradcting muslims and arabs last time and i would want you to read via any international news line about saddam's comments over the problems in iraq.
in his words, he made it clear that the problems in iraq are caused by iraq's enemies the us and iranthe battle here is the battle for supremacy. the fall of saddam gave room for iran to emerge. the easiest way to achieve these personal interests are always to hide under religion and use isreali/palestine conflict a bakup.
if they are fighting a religious war, where is saudia arabia the leaders of muslim. sadam is his programme was to annex saudi after kuwait. why was saddam attacking kuwait? just the battle forsupremacy.
saudi arabia will not live to see iran obtain nuclea weapon. isreal will be the last to see iran achieve that. the iranians are persians and they do not agree with the arabs as they feel superior. it is difficult for iran to achieve her aim without using some of the arab because of the population here.
if anyone wants to atlk the interest of the muslims, the place to start it off will be saudi which is the holly land for the muslims. osama, wanted to atack sadam with the consent of saudi governement but they were looking at the days after the war which might see osama as a hero and he might take over saudi hence they invitation of the un(us).
we have to be realistic here. the ghanians in nigeria were able to leave because they still know their way back but if they were left for many years in nigeria and after most of them will inter marry with nigerians how will you be able to tell a half nigerian and half ghanian to go?
isreal is there and going and leaving to no where is not realistic and the only realistic thing here is peaceful co-existance.
but this does not make the radicals to be at ease. if palestines will be throwing stone at armoured tanks tell me what they will do if they have access to a tank itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 Play (m)
|
I t is interesting that those who invoke International law against Isreal have a minimal understanding of International Law .
People still question the legitimacy of Isreal when it is a member of the UN.How on the planet can u get admission into the UN if there are questions as to your legitimacy?
@Afam
It is typical of someone who has lost an argument to try to divert attention from what is being discused .
You have nothing to offer on the subject of Isreal's failure to comply with International law except your much touted UN link.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afam (m)
|
Honestly, touting a UN link is far better than your futile attempt at twisting and lying your way out of the mess you have found yourself in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
![Nairaland [Nigerian Forum] Home](http://www.nairaland.com/Themes/default/images/english/home.gif)
Author
