Why Hasn't the United Nations Punished Russia for Ukraine? 

The UN has become a corrupt globalist organization more focused on their own goals than helping the world. This is why they are ineffective.

@@Nattleby Yeah I think that's true. I don't like being pessimistic, but I think that trying to get *so many* people to work together from so many different countries would be extraordinarily difficult. I think of the US congress, and those are people from just one country...

The UN is invaluable in its role as an international forum. This is a place where everyone can be on the same page with regards to international norms and conventions. Otherwise the world would be in a much more chaotic place with everyone limit testing each other's sovereignty. With clear and public guidelines and universally agreed conducts and principles such as maritime borders, mechanisms for settling water scarcity and such, then its more likely for a country whose these principles are being violated to have the clear backing of the wider world. It's in everyone's interest (as a given, since they all agreed on these principles and guidelines to begin with) to uphold them and to avoid setting a bad precedence. This is why it's important to have countries like China and Russia take an active role as participating in upholding them, since they buy into the global order and thus the global security burden. If we kick out Russia from the SC then China would have no reason to stay and turn the UN into a NATO club, which means France and Britain would have no reason to stay and it'll just become a USA club. At that point the UN has no legitimacy as an international forum since the big important countries that need to be involved are not.

It's not the world doesn't care.....but the world knows and have seen enough of America's shenanigans and geopolitical bullshyt. The only people who trusts USA and believes she is an agent acting in good faith are all sheeps or in America's words "coalition of the willing and stupid" Just take a look at the US security council meeting on the war in Iraq..... Most countries voted against war and military intervention,even many of us allies like France and Germany except for UK of course America's number one pet and lapdog. But what does it matter? America went ahead and did what she wanted just like all the other times....was she punished?was she condemned?was she coerced or forced out of the UN?did any countries even thought of sanctioning her? Of course not......As long as u have the economic and military power,who is going to stop u?all u have to do is spin enough bullshyt and rhetoric and propaganda to make the bitter pill easier to swallow. The UN is a joke.......condemning Russia for her actions is the act of the highest hypocrisy and ......everybody in the UN is only out for their own political and whatever interests. UN my ass.......1/3rd of the countries there have been oppressed by either USA or USSR or the western coalition over the past 70 years.

That’s why you drink alcohol

That is not true and if you are talking about the Idiot from the WHO. He used the position to push his agenda. Just think he was the man who has never practiced medicine and the first person ever to be the cheif of the WHO in 70 years that has never practiced it and we were taking advice from him on Covid.

They will soon be gone from there

@@danielweiss4498 an assurance to be devoutly wished.

@@tangentreverent4821 is that how NPCs think ?

@@danielweiss4498 Last time I checked, UN was suppossed to unite the world

@@oi2837 you can't unite a dictator . You have to free humanity from this symptom

Talk talk talk and more talk

Maybe, but it's been out of sync for a long time already without there being a true crisis. There are also a lot of proposal to expand permanent membership: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_of_the_United_Nations_Security_Council#Permanent_member_proposals

You mean like India? They are getting close.

because UN exists to leech on your and mine taxes, UN never was helpful in any way and everyone there should be fired from their jobs

The list should expand to Brazil, India, South Africa as permanent members. Don't see why Germany should be kept out still either. We need to force multi polar way of thinking.

@@Gametheory101 1. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us. You explain things in a very relatable way. 2. If The Hague doesn't have any means of enforcement, what do they accomplish? Do they actually do anything?

same can be said about the USA

Same goes for US and UK. Both US and UK needs to be removed as well for killing 1.2 million Iraqis, several hundred thousand in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many other countries. Then let us come to this topic. We all know how the US and NATO spread democracy by bombing the above said countries.

Is impossible to punish a nuclear bomb super power

You tried

Lol

Indian without toilet😂

Dai.....

Russia is the legal successor of USSR, so it inherits all parts of sovet international relations, such as a permanent place on the Security Council.

it's a legal successor to the ussr like how the prc is a legal successor to the roc

@@doktormozg Whole world regrets now that such inheritance occured.

@@doktormozg Says who...? They weren't even last to leave.

@@doktormozg nonsense troll

That's often why such resolutions are put up for a vote even though their supporters know they are destined to fail. And there have been *a lot*. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vetoed_United_Nations_Security_Council_resolutions

@@Gametheory101 Can those nagging votes not be dangerous in a sense, that they give the countries, which are accused of wrong doing, another reason to form an alternative world order? Many countries are already annoyed about the self-rightenous of the western countries in other fields of politics. What is the best way to analyze, when countries will have enough of the current world order? Maybe a chicken game, or the stag-hunt game?

@Hobbesian Thinker Yeah, they did.

Hague, but neither the USA is in, putin is already condemned

Youre very correct in this view of the situation. The issue however that i personally run into is that often when alot of people have these conversations, they always fail to criticise all parties involved in causing harm. The west loves to criticise china or russia for their horrid actions, but never admits to its own. Russia uses plenty of horrible actions and propaganda to push its side, but never admits to its own. And china tends to, from my perspective up in sweden, stay quite silent about these topics in general. Or atleast thats what ive seen living so far away from them. The united states was incredibly happy messing with south america with operation condor and other similar actions around the globe, especially in the middle east. European nations have been very involved in the middle east, and in africa, like forexample french agents assassinating leaders and peace negotiators. Russia and the east in general is very agressive to outside powers or people, and seems to love very blunt and brute force actions and propaganda, and harms many. China takes horrible actions within its own borders, and seems to like meddling with other nations heavily, especially in economic ways globally. From my own experiences and from what ive heard from others, often there isnt alot anyone can do to genuinely take a ''good'' stance on these issues. As a swede, my country takes horrible actions constantly, hurts people all around the globe, and hurts people within its own borders constantly. The west in general is awful constantly, and NATO isnt something i truly believe in having some absolute good force in the world. For me, i just loosely support nato and the west, because i care about the wellbeing of myself, my friends, my family, and people i hear from! i care for people in finland, and i fear for their safety being close to russia. i feel awful for ukranian people as i often have contact with people from there. im fully aware im being controlled by western propaganda alot of the time, and i try to fight it but at the end of the day, i still just want safety for those i care for. I can imagine people from all different places in the world have similar stances on things, and support whatever may achieve safety for them and their loved ones. i think people try to claim their side as the ''right'' one alot, but underneath i think alot of people are just supporting what controls safety for their loved ones. if anyone tries to support no side, theyre left all alone without any real power to oppose these massive structures

@@thefrostbee4182 I understand you i know you side with your country to protect your individual interests despite the fact you are aware of your nations atrocities, it's actually nice for you to understand the reality of the situation and take actions that prioritize your well being. I would have done the same but you Sweeden doesn't really need to join NATO, there's a clause in the EU that allows Finlad and Sweeden to actually gain the benefits of NATO without joining it. If you were invaded the EU would send forces to defend the collective EU. This may be another reason why Russia is invading Ukraine because if it does not do it now it will lose more in the future when it joins the EU. Russia is already going to be sanctioned and they are desperate to hold whatever power they may have left. I don't know the specifics of this defense agreement but i think that highlights another problem with western media. It ommits this information so that Sweeden and Finland can join NATO meaning that anything that doesn't fit the narrative will be stamped out. Western media free speech is dead and for a long time i realized it. I thought that it was a good source of reliable information but it was not. It was a propaganda institution that promotes narratives that suits the interests of the institutions of western nations. It's a propaganda outlet but we haven't realized it because it adapted and became better at it than Russia or China. The only difference between Chinese and Russian propaganda against the west is simply that the west is better at hiding it. Western nations are more subtle in their intervention than most would realize. They claim a war as an operation for liberation when it's a clear war of conquest and people fell for it. This is why i disagree with your last paragraph because people aren't really aware about these things. In twitter i saw a liberal commenting that what happened in Iraq is not as horrible as what happened in Mariupol. To show how delusional that statement is, do you the city of Fellujiah. It was said to be the cities of mosques but that changed after the war. 3 battles happened and out of 200 mosques that were previously built only around 140 of them stand and those that survive are often crippled. The US used so many chemicals (white phosphorus, depleted Uranium) in Fellujiah to the point where 14.7% of children born there have birth defects. That's worse than what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki where there is a rate of 1% percent of birth defects. And considering 140 of the mosques stand it means that 30% of the city was totally annihilated similar to the destruction seen in WW2. I didn't make this comparison it was the delusional people in twitter. Do you see the problem, it was nice to see someone like you because people like you knew. The majority that speak though do not and they make statements like these that they are no better than propaganda. With this statement they are trying to whitewash their crimes whilst condemning Russia. This is why the west is failing, it's mask have begun to fall apart and people are beginning to see the truth but unfortunately one a few thousands of us know in a nation of millions that do not know. At least you are aware of the truths others blindly belief things. I say this because i was one of them too with similar mindsets and a similar view of the world. This is the reality of this world ones that western institutions are trying to hide. They forgot that they are supporting Ukraine that officially integrated Nazis in their ranks. The massacre in Bucha was said to have been done by Russia but i don't belief them. I've seen what happens when Russia takes control of cities. The people there protest in the cities and there was not a single bullet fired. How come did the russians actually killed people in Bucha when past actions say otherwise. The mayor of Bucha claimed there was no atrocities there when Ukranians liberated the town. But suddenly they say that there was a massacre. I don't know what happened but at this day and age someone should have recorded this just like the previous protests. There were no videos there. What i actually got were videos of Ukranians being told to shoot people with white armband as they claim they are cleaning up this place from saboteurs and traitors. Most of the people that died have white armbands and do you know what those represent. They represent Russian supporters that have been executed. At best the casualties are done by accidental fire from both forces and at worst this was done by Ukraine and they blamed it on Russia. When you consider how western media has operated in Syria and Iraq. It paints a bleak picture, when you consider who benefits most from this massacre it is clear that Ukraine and the west is the one that actually committed the massacre. The problem is that it is not actually confirmed and Russia's request for an independent investigation was denied. Russia requested an independent investigation not one done by Russia. Even if this massacre was committed by Russia we can't actually confirm when the west actions of denying an independent investigation and their insistence of their narratives makes it hard to believe them. Western media has lied before just like in Iraq when they said there were nuclear weapons. I view it this way because this is critical thinking, i ask questions and it's clear you do as well but the problem is most people don't. That's why ultimately i believe democracy is a sham because what is the point when people can't think critically. If there were more people like you then it would have been better but sadly that is not the case. If you don't want to fall for propaganda from whether side. Think critically, ask questions when things don't connect. Find the motives and those who stand to benefit from a result. Atrocities aren't committed without logical reason, there is always someone to benefit. Find the one who does and the picture will become clearer. That is all i have to say.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Power to the people. Universal human rights.🕊

@@covid6942 You seem to have more or less found the truth in the situation here. The West is great at propaganda because it doesn’t always need to lie. It just tells the truths it likes, and doesn’t promote truths it dislikes. It is true Russia is committing endless atrocities so western media speaks on it, but when Ukraine or the US or European nations do, it’s not covered on media outlets. However, I do think you should know, there is a growing movement of dissent and uproar in the west. The west has almost no real democracies. People are experiencing crisis overload, and lately it’s caused more and more people to resist it. People are waking up to the situation, but it’ll be a slow process until much happens. But it’s still worth it to keep an eye out! Mostly it’s younger generations that have people fighting against it, but it’s people in general. The west can’t hide its atrocities forever

@@thefrostbee4182 Western media don't just ommit the truth they also made blatant lies. Remember Iraq, the US claimed there were nuclear weapons there but there were none. The media kept the lie up by lying so much they kept broadcasting the same thing over and over again that for a time people believed it to be true. The truth about Iraq was eventually found but western media repeated the tactic with greater results of success. The media flooded the internet with the same lies that veryfiying on what happened in Ukraine is difficult. If all the narratives are of the same then is what happening in Ukraine actually true. May we see a repeat of Iraq or worse mean that freedom of opinion is non existent. Think about it what is the point of freedom of opinion when there is one opinion. The west claims that freedom of expression and opinion as a founding basis of their morality but the problem is that everyone from social media, news broadcasters, governments, and everyone is repeating the same opinion. What is the point of freedom of opinion when there is only one opinion tolerated. This analogy wasn't made by me it was actually made by President Basharl Assad. I thought that he was the typical tyrant but his discussion of his country's future says otherwise. He is a dictator but he cares about Syria's future not just in a few years but in the decades to come. This raises a question about the validity of our opinion. Is our hate for these figures justified, is there another side that we have yet to uncover. I don't even know if the truth about him is actually true or not. It's hard for people to break their Bublé but with the recent culture of left vs right and the radicalisation of political debates especially in the US. I have doubts if the people could ever find peace and truth. The future outlook is grim, our world is currently heading to a time of instability where factors such as energy, climate, economy are changing that predicting the future is hard. Not trying to be a defeatist or nihilist but we really need to see the reality of this world if we are to not repeat past mistakes. I still have hopes that we may live a good life but that comes with the gripes of dealing with the issue of morality. Atrocities are happening everyday but when do people actually care, people are just apathetic to the slaughter of thousands until it happens to them or is used as propaganda to hurt other nations. The Bucha massacre may be a false flag attack or just staged. We don't know and any investigation won't happen since everyone is willing to use the massacre to further their own agendas. That's why to the guy who said that two wrongs don't make a right. I say of course they are wrong but it does highlight how people are using atrocities to further their own agenda. Corpses make good weapons especially for the media on both sides. I refuse to condemn the atrocities in Ukraine because to do so I will have to condemn every other atrocities. I will not be a hypocrite and admit that I don't care if people died. It just happens and nothing could be done to stop it. Unless humanity magically becomes kinder then the dream is an impossibility. If may make be bad as a person but I refuse to be a hypocrite and this is my criticism of western institutions. They are hypocrites and that's why I dislike them and condemn them. Russia and China may be as well but their soft power is terrible and their propaganda isn't as effective that most can see them and not care for them.

Pure Logic but people will somehow argue against it

It's not the world doesn't care.....but the world knows and have seen enough of America's shenanigans and geopolitical bullshyt. The only people who trusts USA and believes she is an agent acting in good faith are all sheeps or in America's words "coalition of the willing and stupid" Just take a look at the US security council meeting on the war in Iraq..... Most countries voted against war and military intervention,even many of us allies like France and Germany except for UK of course America's number one pet and lapdog. But what does it matter? America went ahead and did what she wanted just like all the other times....was she punished?was she condemned?was she coerced or forced out of the UN?did any countries even thought of sanctioning her? Of course not......As long as u have the economic and military power,who is going to stop u? The UN is a joke.......condemning Russia for her actions is the act of the highest hypocrisy and ......everybody in the UN is only out for their own political and whatever interests. UN my ass.......1/3rd of the countries there have been oppressed by either USA or USSR or the western coalition over the past 70 years.

There could be a Permanent just the Permanent members can't vote if they are the subject of the vote, that or they can't do their Veto.

Technically true

US and UK needs to be removed as well for killing 1.2 million Iraqis, several hundred thousand in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many other countries. Then let us come to this topic. We all know how the US and NATO spread democracy by bombing the above said countries.

To be fair, all member of UNSC including USA, china, france, UK and russia can't vetoed the UN resolution against them if they break the international law by indiscriminately attack other country. So the UN can punished them all without hampered by veto.

Why did UK veto UN investigation into Ukraine 'atrocities?' Because like Syrian gas 'atrocities', they are fake. UK/UK want war and desruction of EU. Germany won't recover for years and will have a multi-billion debt of buying new weapons from US. Its win/win for US.

dissolve and what will you replace it with we saw what will happen when there is no intergovernmental organization arms race,famines,wars,etc what we need to replace is not the organization but the people which run it which is the people that run your countries

@@perlasandoval7883 What a messy collection of words left. It is obviously something should be changed because UN showed its ineffectiveness in its basic obligations. And what that might be? - We will see. Civilized countries now stay together as never since WW2. Just look at the votes distrubution last month on russia aggression condemnation - lesser civilized country more probability to support russia. It basically shows that at this moment autocracy vs democracy fight is began.

@@volodymyrvashchyshyn34 the old generation the ones most likely to vote and take office the old are afraid of change not knowing how to live in a new era because of this they create their own bubble of reality which is more and more disconnected with reality and since the world is becoming more and more depressed their ideas are popular with everyone no matter how realistic they are to change the institutions we must change our selves who keep the institutions running and then those who oversee it before changing the institutions themselves

Why did UK veto UN investigation into Ukraine 'atrocities?' Because like Syrian gas 'atrocities', they are fake. UK/UK want war and desruction of EU. Germany won't recover for years and will have a multi-billion debt of buying new weapons from US. Its win/win for US.

they tried to stop north korea through sanctions but china is a pain myanmar? well they kinda did but the tensions in Myanmar is complicated thanks to diversity israel they tried but usa blocked it and serbia they intervened through NATO

US and UK needs to be removed as well for killing 1.2 million Iraqis, several hundred thousand in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many other countries. Then let us come to this topic. We all know how the US and NATO spread democracy by bombing the above said countries.

the US and China are the only winners of this war. US gets to sell it's gas to Europe and China gets a vassal Russia, it's clear as day

Osama Bin Laden, Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein. Are you High?

​@@jordanomasuin8023 And So? Bin Laden has nothing to do with the reasoning, the others were legittimate heads of their states. And I will ask you another question, why USA (if is so important to fight against dictatorship and terrorism) didn't invadedSaudi Arabia? (for example)

@@micheleciccotosto2728 You need to grow a brain, Like seriously you need to get a brain., Saddam Hussein executed half of his government live on television, used chemical weapons on his own people, tried invading Iran, used chemical weapons on Iran, Fired SCUD missiles at Saudi Arabia and Israel, Invaded Kuwait for their oil which was proven in the UN as Kuwait reported prior to the invasion that Iraq was drilling into their oil reserves, forced Deportation of Kuwaitis to Baghdad, Tried acquiring Nuclear weapons until the UN shut him down. That is the first person you are defending with countless other acts. Osama was the mastermind behind the twin towers. Following the atrocity the US Intelligence found out bin laden was in Afghanistan the US government issued a demand to the Afghanistan government to hand him over, They refused. The USA issued them a final warning or they would be forced to invade they refused again. The USA went into the war for one reason bin laden, famously when they got him when they found out he fled to Pakistan they wanted to pull out all of their troops right there and then but the British made them stay to train a army to stop a vacuum getting created over a power struggle which they thought would ruin the stability to countries in the region. The USA doesn't care about the Taliban they went in for one reason Bin laden and if they handed him over the USA would of never been in Afghanistan but they decided to harbour a criminal on that calibre, they had no choice but to go in over public opinion and not only that but if they didn't more actions like that would of happened in the USA. Gaddafi launched a terror campaign against the British and Americans he supplied terror groups around the world with semtex with the intention of bringing chaos to the USA and Britain famously in my country were he armed the IRA ( the Irish republican army) to their teeth for their bombing campaign that is not even including all the crimes he did in Libya or when people were protesting outside the Libyan embassy in London the members of the embassy opened fired on a peaceful crowd in London! Your argument is they were "Legitimate heads of their states" so they are allowed do anything they want without retaliation? C'mon Rocks have bigger brains all three of them were criminals and done severe crimes against Humanity now you are acting like they are some angels. Also in regards to Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi their own people done the job in the end. So what is it you are too ignorant or just plain rock? Saudi Arabia is a terrible state but they done nothing against the USA if they did the USA would be there yesterday. The USA , Britain, NATO they are not the world police or there to uphold peace. That is the job of the UN which sanctioned the invasion of Libya and Iraq. The USA is on the UNSC and so is Britain they are obligated to carry out the wishes of the UN. To act like these countries did nothing you are a deep dreamer. All three had casus bellis on them over their actions all three. So if you are looking for role models and you name those three countries it tells everyone you have no idea in what you are talking about. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-UTJXg4ACLK8.html&ab_channel=kevinsmith - Gaddafi and the IRA. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kLUktJbp2Ug.html&ab_channel=AmericanHeroesChannel - Saddam Hussein Purge. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xCpCEByLbVY.html&ab_channel=AlJazeeraEnglish - Libyan embassy open fire on peaceful protest in London. This is also just from the top of my head all three done Countless I mean countless crimes and you are telling me the USA and their allies had no business? That these 3 stooges are the leaders of the free world? Kids have bigger brains literally.

@@micheleciccotosto2728 you wouldn’t invade a major trading partner

@@dinosaurfan3678 It wasn't a real question, it was to show that USA did the same things but with far worse violence and crimes (for now naturally, for example Willy Pete was in Iraq) and that it wasn't done for democracy, liberty or other false pretexts.

yea

@@ishan7735 I thought they surrendered at the beginning of the war

@@wamnicho ussr,britain etc allies defeated germany and france regained its territory again

Who they? 😏😏 Russia can f all Europe an UN. And make new world.

were you outraged when they were bombing donbass ? Nope, you didn't care.

@@kirillholt2329 if what you say is true and clearly know this pls tell me how many where killed in Donbas and how large the dmg cost is in 8 years of artillery?

There is a very complicated way the General Assembly can do this by shifting recognition of Russia to some entity that isn't Putin's government, but there is basically no chance it will happen here. It did happen with ROC/PRC, though, which is how the UNSC got where it is today: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3a_-NojmIPA.html

Why did UK veto UN investigation into Ukraine 'atrocities?' Because like Syrian gas 'atrocities', they are fake. UK/UK want war and desruction of EU. Germany won't recover for years and will have a multi-billion debt of buying new weapons from US. Its win/win for US.

@@Gametheory101 take the power from Russia and give it to Ireland

@@theirishempire4952 ireland militarily weak economically a tax haven causing tensions and northern ireland is still a thing

@@perlasandoval7883 Ireland has contributed the most peacekeeping forces to the UN and we are Neutral a perfect pick for the UN security council

More than half. African continent, India and China alone make up over 4 billion, which is already more than half

I don't think it is an active problem now. The point was that it could be in the future---or something like it, not just Karelia, as these concerns are extremely common in all alliance relationships. Public polling on it has a sizable minority (but still a minority) of Finns with irredentist preferences without the backing of NATO. Overall, I don't think these problems will ultimately stop NATO and Finland from having a productive relationship. For more, Wikipedia has a useful page on this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelian_question

@@Gametheory101 Thanks for replying and the wiki link, that was actually pretty interesting read. I personally think that the polling results can be a little misleading on both directions because of the phrasing of the question. Thanks again for replying, you really got me deep into digging in this rabbit hole. 😁

Yeah, I don't know what to make of the polling results either! But that's kind of the point with entrapment. Not knowing makes the alliance patron more cautious than they would ideally want to be.

exactly 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Right

Why did UK veto UN investigation into Ukraine 'atrocities?' Because like Syrian gas 'atrocities', they are fake. UK/UK want war and desruction of EU. Germany won't recover for years and will have a multi-billion debt of buying new weapons from US. Its win/win for US.

The Reds and the blues never went to war, I say it's incredibly successful.

"somewhat successful~ish" You actually consider the Rwandan genocide, the Yugoslav War, The Vietnam war, Iraq and Ukraine to be succesful-ish. Genius.

True. But this is the nuclear option.

Russia is the OVIOUS succesor of the USSR, Besides what nation would the rest of the G5 choose to replace Russia? IF any pro west nation is picked, the G5 becomes pointless as it would be mostly filled with US allies.

@@tetraxis3011 India

@@saintjames1995 India literally still has a caste system. I’m pretty sure that the UN wouldn’t like that for a possible G5 member

@@tetraxis3011 then Poland. Or Japan.

​@@saintjames1995you did not Wright poland 😅

did usa intentionally target civilians? did usa intentionally kill civilians? did usa mass killed civilians?

For one thing, the US went to the UN Security Council first. The council proceeded to pass the resolution that gave sufficient legal wiggle room and ambiguity to mandate the invasion. The US operated within the constraints of international law. Moreover, the US invaded Iraq and effectively took over the government of the country. Russia wages war against hospitals and maternity wards. Ergo, not the same by a long shot.

@@nicolaasp.m.brantjes9769 Do you really believe that? Julian Assange is being punished for leaking a video showing war crimes committed by US soldiers. Obama had a drone strike on an American citizen. The media has lied to us on just about everything possible. Call it black pill or whatever but there is just too much disinformation going around. The US, contributing more money to international organizations would, of course, get more support on military operations. Legal doesn’t mean right. Come to think of it, a country that is at the border is probably of more concern than one on the other side of the globe. John Mearsheimer describes US foreign policy as reckless and/or callous; the US can afford to act in such a way because of its hegemony but now that China is increasingly becoming a threat, the US needs to act more strategically on the geopolitical stage.

because usa were spreading democrasy so it doesnt count as invasion :D

Because we run shit and your country doesn’t

Why did UK veto UN investigation into Ukraine 'atrocities?' Because like Syrian gas 'atrocities', they are fake. UK/UK want war and desruction of EU. Germany won't recover for years and will have a multi-billion debt of buying new weapons from US. Its win/win for US.

The same reason man

US and UK needs to be removed as well for killing 1.2 million Iraqis, several hundred thousand in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many other countries. Then let us come to this topic. We all know how the US and NATO spread democracy by bombing the above said countries.

The US needs to be aswell then

I would make a more favourable impression to Kim-Jong-Un than Saddam Hussein..

Get off the drugs, buddy.

US and UK needs to be removed as well for killing 1.2 million Iraqis, several hundred thousand in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many other countries. Then let us come to this topic. We all know how the US and NATO spread democracy by bombing the above said countries.

Did you not see the map of those who condemed? I can name them if you want.

So, are you ok with the destruction of Ukraine?? Are you with Russia?? Are you anti-American??

Russian bot , idie nahooy

So very true.

You are completely uneducated you want to research the Wagner group there is more Nazis in Ukraine from Russia than from Ukraine. Wagner was also named after Hitler's favourite Composer Richard Wagner. Second of all Julian Assange is a criminal he aided in hacking into federal computers with the intention of leaking classified information which is espionage, second of all he is wanted in Sweden for Sexual crimes. So either way he is going to jail and rightfully so because he is a criminal. He will end up spending his life in bars if found convicted.

No, he has pretty strong points

Exactly bro

NATO is not responsible for Syria and Libya. Libya started by UN resolution. Syria was not NATO operation… In Afganistan NATO was part of UN created ISAF.

US and UK needs to be removed as well for killing 1.2 million Iraqis, several hundred thousand in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and many other countries. Then let us come to this topic. We all know how the US and NATO spread democracy by bombing the above said countries.

I believe India should stick to making curry and keep the world-wide scam calls from happening.

No they absolutely shouldn't

They are on the UNSC and voted abstain on a unprovoked genocidal invasion of Ukraine if anything their seat should be removed because they do not meet the Criteria of the UN charter to uphold international peace and security.

@@jordanomasuin8023 By your rationale, the U.S. should have been kicked out of the UNSC for the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. Americans might have a short-term memory, but the World doesn't.

@@GolfNut867 No they shouldn't be, They are a P5 member, No P5 member should ever be removed. you should research how the UN functions. The UN only works over P5 members without them the UN wouldn't exist. Not even Russia should be removed from a p5. You should look up the reason why the UN had P5 members. India on the other handed is voted in to the UNSC with the job of upholding international peace and security so voting abstain is a big red flag and they should be removed alongside any other member that was silent and voted abstain on the UNSC. They do not meet the Criteria to be in that position. When a Unprovoked and genocidal invasion happened and India remained silent and voted Abstain. I am sorry They should of been removed instantly that is a major disappointment from India. They shown they were no different morally than China or Pakistan when faced with Morality in what is right or wrong. When Russia embarked on the Road to conquest they remained silent over the Russo-India arms deals. In fact they are even aiding Russia By increasing oil imports whilst the EU is decreasing counter-acting the sanctions. India doesn't meet the Criteria of the UNSC not by a longshot. How can anyone say that is for stability of world peace? By voting Abstain and being silent as a member of the UNSC when a country has been unprovoked invaded and a genocidal war inflicted on it? How dare you even try and compare Ukraine to Iraq with Saddam Hussein.

Lol oh yes that's going to go well for the world. Europe will be lost in a matter of minutes. What countries should donis mind they own business like they did with Iraq so many war crimes committed and the u.s won't be hold responsible for it 🤔 so such is war and the crimes that go with them everyone can cry war crimes but no body will take responsibility for it not Russia not amrica not the uk no one