The Disgrace of the United Nations on Israel - WSJ Editorial

[question everything]

In the ever-expanding hall of shame for propagators of global disorder, prepare a special pedestal for United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres. His disgraceful remarks Tuesday to the Security Council are an example of why the U.N. can’t be counted on to keep the peace anywhere.

Mr. Guterres’s comments amount to nothing less than an apologia for Hamas terrorists, despite a few thin caveats. “It is important to also recognize the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum,” he said of the Iran-backed terror group’s Oct. 7 invasion of southern Israel, which claimed more than 1,400 lives.

Lest anyone miss his point: “The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation. They have seen their land steadily devoured by settlements and plagued by violence; their economy stifled; their people displaced and their homes demolished.” Although he allowed that these “grievances” don’t justify the “appalling attacks by Hamas,” he warned that “those appalling attacks cannot justify the collective punishment of the Palestinian people.” We quote Mr. Guterres at length in case readers assume someone in his position couldn’t really have delivered a speech of this sort. He did.

(snip)

This false equivalence elevates Mr. Guterres’s comments to the destructive from merely foolish. His message to the world’s rogues is that if you go on a killing spree, the U.N. will help justify your depredations. Will Mr. Guterres concoct some excuse if Beijing invades Taiwan—or Philippine territory? This is how the U.N. makes itself a fellow traveler in the advancing march of global disorder.

https://archive.ph/bY9He

[claudette]

1. First of all

I don’t see it as a “false equivalency.” It sounds like the opposite. He definitely made the point that Hamas’ attack on Israel was appalling but he compared it to Israel’s “collective punishment” of the Palestinian people which has caused many times the casualties and suffering.

[HUAJIAO]

2. I agree 100%. This issue goes back more than 2000 years. It is not so simple to cast single blame.

[Beastly Boy]

9. He atually contrasted Hamas and Israel, not compared them.

He painted Hamas as appalling, and Israel as committing a war crime. In actuality, it is the exact opposite: Hamas is the war criminal here. Were Guterres in any way even-handed, he would have called Israel appalling and accused Hamas of collective punishment. What he did is worse than a false equivalency, it is a fake equivalency.

A UN double-standard, followed by double-speak, and everybody knows this.

[marybourg]

3. The United Nations has been ministering to the Palestinians

for decades and has come, as an institution and as individuals, to identify with them and their interests and beliefs.

[SouthernDem4ever]

4. We can talk about all this AFTER Hamas is removed

We don't negotiate with terrorists, remember?

[Big Blue Marble]

5. You actually post an editorial from the WSJ?

Do you know who these editorial writers are?

You might want to follow the inspiration of your board name.

[question everything]

6. I do. Often. Examples, from September alone:

House Republicans Hang Separately - WSJ Editorial

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016363861

The Real Donald Trump Live on Truth Social - WSJ Editorial

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016364616

Republicans Cut Off Their Own Heads - WSJ Editorial

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016365171

The False Choice Between Ukraine and Israel - WSJ Editorial

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016366305

Donald Trump's Israeli War Insight - WSJ Editorial

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016366306

and from today

The Third Quarter GDP Boom - WSJ Editorial

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016367186

You may want to browse them

[Big Blue Marble]

7. Actually, I do not want anything to with the editorial board of Murdock's WSJ

Their bias is and always has been anti-democratic, pro-business, and to my knowledge has
a built in bias against the UN as well as a strong pro Israel bias.

If I am wrong, please show me an editorial supporting the UN or one discussing a reasonable
and balanced solution to the Palestine dilemma.

They may not approve of the sharp swing of their party to far-right crazies, but they are
are still far too the right of any good DU member.

[marybourg]

8. Please explicate a "reasonable and balanced solution to the Palestine dilemma ".

[Big Blue Marble]

10. That would be

Last edited Sat Oct 28, 2023, 03:42 AM - Edit history (1)

one which deeply understands the historical narrative of both peoples and recognizes the complexities of balancing each peoples needs and desires in order to find a way for all to
live in peace and prosperity with dignity and self-determination.

[marybourg]

11. Yeah, but what would it *be*?

You’re just describing a wish list, after demanding a result from somebody else.