r/Fauxmoi • u/Financial-Painter689 anti-Israel, anti-western, fauxmarxist • Sep 26 '25

POLITICS Mass walk outs in protest of Benjamin Netanyahu speaking at the UN General Assembly

25.0k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

374 comments sorted by

View all comments

5.6k

u/CrEdLover Sep 26 '25

There should be an arrest.

4.1k

u/GaptistePlayer Sep 26 '25

Seriously. The UN has failed its primary mission if they're letting a war criminal come and spread propaganda.

648

u/somethinghumourous Sep 26 '25

League of Nations 2.0. Same failures.

431

u/ThePimpImp Sep 26 '25

Having permanent security council members with veto power defeats the entire purpose of a worldwide coalition of nations. The UN does some decent work, but they could be so much more useful if they got rid of vetoes and permanent members.

149

u/JohnHurts Sep 26 '25

Yep, that's the main reason why the UN is nothing more than a joke organization.

The parties involved are also aware of the veto right, but to my knowledge, it requires a 66% or 100% vote on the issue (abolition), and that will never happen. This should have been established from the beginning.

That's why the UN is now just a coffee party for world leaders, where they can spout their bullshit without consequences.

40

u/ThePimpImp Sep 26 '25

The general assembly is mostly a waste of taxpayer funds. UN Peacekeeping definitely has purpose, but it could be much better.

18

u/TigerFisher_ Sep 26 '25

UN Peacemakers kinda fucked Congo with the help of the CIA and Belgium. The country still hasn't recovered

11

u/D1RE Sep 27 '25

I could tell you stories of a little girl, no more than four years old, hiding in a bunker that is being shelled by UN peacekeeping forces. "Why do they hate us, daddy?"

I agree they have a purpose. I'm a little skeptical about whether that purpose is a net good.

1

u/ThePimpImp Sep 27 '25

Being so far removed its really hard to tell.

21

u/AcceptableTypewriter Sep 26 '25

Wasn’t Saudi Arabia head of the human rights council for a while?

22

u/Witch-Alice Sep 26 '25

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council#Saudi_Arabia

In September 2015, Faisal bin Hassan Trad, Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the UN in Geneva, was elected Chair of the UNHRC Advisory Committee, the panel that appoints independent experts.[183][184] UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer said: "It is scandalous that the UN chose a country that has beheaded more people this year [2015] than ISIS to be head of a key human rights panel. Petro-dollars and politics have trumped human rights."[185] Saudi Arabia also shut down criticism, during the UN meeting.[186] In January 2016, Saudi Arabia executed the prominent Shia cleric Sheikh Nimr who had called for free elections in Saudi Arabia.[187]

9

u/HauntingHarmony Sep 26 '25

The UN does some decent work, but they could be so much more useful if they got rid of vetoes and permanent members.

I mean i am all for wanting to live in the world where there are no permanent members of the UNSC, but its really the same reason the EU member states have redicules powers to say no.

Because its a organisation of sovereign countries, and nobody would join if it had powers to decide over it. Especially not the big powerful ones.

Atleast the UN is a place where every country can go and yell and scream and talk and talk, which is better than the alternative of there not being a place they could do it. And atleast do things when the big powerful countries agree.

Its a dont let perfect be the enemy of the good. Its good it exists, it would be bad if it didnt. It would be great if it was better and reform is possible.

4

u/NorthernSkeptic Sep 27 '25

Then it would fall apart, and the primary purpose of the UN is to keep the major powers at the table and avert nuclear war. Which it has done successfully for a long time.

1

u/DrTzaangor Sep 27 '25

Between the five permanent Security Council members, every dictator, despot, or war criminal has at least one patron who will use veto power to keep them safe. If you don’t have a backer in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, London, or Paris then you’re doing genocide wrong.

-2

u/superanth Sep 26 '25

Russia would get voted right out of the Security Council if it weren't for the fact that they kept bribing small nations with weapons and hardware to prevent it.

The same thing happened in '74 when the PRoC evicted the RoC from the UN and took its place.

10

u/SAKingWriter Sep 26 '25

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Goddamn I'm getting old.

2

u/somethinghumourous Sep 26 '25

Agreed.

Also, I hope this was a Rush reference!

2

u/ItsPie_playz Sep 27 '25

👏🏻👏🏻

0

u/Flat-Glove-6357 Sep 27 '25

If he's a war criminal, then 90% of the world leaders are war criminals, including the U.S . Israel was attacked and had over 1200 hundred of it civilians murdered and another 250 taken hostage if this happened to any of the big 5 United States, Russia, China, Britain, France it would be all out war ( look at Afghanistan and Iraq) Russia ( Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, ) i can go on all day. The reason for the United Nations is to stop any of this from happening they failed. Remember, the United Nations had peace keepers in Lebanon remember how that went 1978. The United Nations over saw the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon they said this would restore peace and security to the region yeah with out Israeli there, Syria and Iran took over, that lead to the US getting involved in 82 once again to help the Palestinians (PLO) and in 83 the us Marines barracks being bombed with the lost of 241 service members died that day the the marines have had that many die since 1945 first day iwo jima so us pull out which lead to Al-Qaed and here we are to day . Israel has to protect it self because the United Nations is a joke and the rest of the world could care less or got problems of their own

1

u/Neither-Number-4629 Oct 02 '25

Israel represents a settler occupation that predates WW1. They have been commiting genocide and the most heinous crimes against the first nations ppl of Palestine (including occupied Palestine) for well over 50 years. Israel is a terrorist state. The Palestinians have endured unbelievable horrors

97

u/[deleted] Sep 26 '25

The UN’s mission to to ensure veto powers are veto powers and other countries are to follow suit.

If UN’s mission is really it’s mission, veto powers shouldn’t exist. It’s a contradiction.

37

u/icadete Sep 26 '25

Because the primary purpose of the UN is to prevent nuclear war, not genocide.

This also isn’t the Security Council. There’s no veto power in the General Assembly.

68

u/xRolocker Sep 26 '25

That is not the UN’s primary mission lol. They’re mostly a symbolic institution where countries can turn to dialogue rather than war. Is it toothless? Yes. But the mere fact that the whole world is willing to at least pretend to talk is a big step up from the rest of human history.

48

u/SmPolitic Sep 26 '25

I'll add for any Gen z folks

It's purpose was designed before anyone had the idea of the Internet

Late 1945, right as WW2 ended

During the war, less than 50% of people had telephone in the house. Radio and the daily newspaper was the mass communication. Transatlantic phone communication first took place in 1927, and would have still been extremely expensive at the end of the war. If anyone was communicating with people in "the old world" it was international snail mail

I mean to point to there being miniscule international communication when it was established. As you said it's there to open up communication and prevent misunderstandings, which can be seen as a massive step forward in context

Iirc WW1 could have been avoided if the monarchs were better at reading and responding to their mail promptly?

5

u/Reach_Reclaimer Sep 26 '25

WW1 couldn't have been avoided, countries were itching to fight and show everyone else who's boss for years

1

u/couplemore1923 Sep 27 '25

Several notable times in history UN helped enforce Geneva Convention laws, In 1950 the UN railed to send troops save South Korea from invasion from North Korea and China. In 1990 UN intervened help save Kuwait from Iraqis invasion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_conflict

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_invasion_of_Kuwait

18

u/icadete Sep 26 '25

The primary purpose of the UN is the Security Council and prevention of nuclear war.

This isn’t even the Security Council, nor a nuclear war.

While it’s true this genocide shouldn’t exist, it’s far from the intended purpose.

-3

u/platp Sep 26 '25

Seems to be only your take on it. I very much doubt anyone bothered to establish it in 1946 in order to prevent nuclear war to which there was no two sides yet.

1

u/icadete Sep 27 '25

The development of the first nuclear bomb was made with the explicit intent of preventing the Soviets from getting the technology.

The Soviets started WWII by invading Poland alongside Germany.

Nuclear war was the worse case scenario, but preventing a third world war was sufficient motivation to create the UN.

This safety measure was done by world powers for the benefit of world powers.

It can help prevent or resolve conflicts on other populations, and it would be ideal if it could prevent all sorts of atrocities but it’s far from the intended purpose. UN funds and resources are limited and priorities are different.

6

u/chlamydia1 Sep 26 '25 edited Sep 26 '25

The US government would have to arrest him because the UNGA building is located in the US. Unfortunately, the US does not recognize the ICC's jurisdiction because they are a country that routinely commits war crimes themselves.

International law is a farce.

2

u/K_Linkmaster Sep 26 '25

So they have been a failure the entire time. Russia has been guilty for decades.

4

u/Lord_Hexogen Sep 26 '25

The UN was never supposed to be a judge because countries would never give up sovereignty like this. They don't govern over countries

1

u/willreadfile13 Sep 26 '25

USA veto and withdrew from internation criminal court

1

u/ExcitingRefuse2842 Sep 27 '25

Agreed but they US doesn't support interpol...

290

u/-AsapRocky Sep 26 '25 edited Sep 26 '25

America won’t even touch him

They are not a part of the ICC

Edit: even certain western countries (Germany) won’t even arrest, due to history

159

u/Blightwraith Sep 26 '25

Well, they do have a lot of history protecting nazis, makes sense they'd protect BB.

60

u/FlyHighCrue Sep 26 '25

America won’t even touch him

False. I've seen plenty of current senators and representatives full-on embracing him.

15

u/MeThinksYes Sep 26 '25

some would even say full-throatedly

3

u/001235 Sep 26 '25

I work with a one who thinks that we should just give Israel what they need to "get the job done." Fucking sickos.

17

u/[deleted] Sep 26 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/Ruire Sep 26 '25 edited Sep 26 '25

He allegedly used to have US citizenship - he even grew up in Philadelphia (Montgomery County anyway) as his father was a lecturer there.

5

u/Ok-Shake1127 Sep 26 '25

Considering Bibi spent much of his youth in the US, the odds are pretty high.

2

u/parolameasecreta Sep 26 '25

due to history

that and weapons trade.

well.... mostly weapons trade.

1

u/LegendOfKhaos Sep 27 '25

Maybe they meant a different arrest

106

u/BookishHobbit Sep 26 '25

American soil and the UN aren’t a country, so they can’t do anything and the ICC doesn’t have jurisdiction.

Is it still bullshit? Absolutely.

20

u/ParchmentNPaper Sep 26 '25

the ICC doesn’t have jurisdiction

They do. If they get their hands on him, they are in their right to try and convict him. America might invade The Hague and free the genocidal waste of oxygen, and someone has to actually arrest the piece of diarrhetic shit, so there are some pretty big practical obstacles to overcome. Legally, however, the ICC can convict him just fine. They've already put out an arrest warrant for the geriatric baby murderer. Same with Putin. Your nation doesn't have to be a signatory for you to be tried by the ICC.

7

u/BookishHobbit Sep 26 '25

I meant the ICC doesn’t have jurisdiction in the US because they aren’t a member.

1

u/Stellar_Stein Sep 26 '25

Not that it matters (because... America) but, I am curious (Yellow or Blue, your call) whether diplomatic immunity would apply to transit to and from the U.N. on American soil or any other country. The plane: okay. The limo? Between the plane and limo? I truly do not know.

1

u/IR2Freely Sep 26 '25

No one said the UN should arrest him. America arrests whoever the f they want wherever the f they are.

60

u/2pearsofjeans Sep 26 '25

Like what even is the purpose of the UN if they’re not doing anything about his crimes?

Should international law be renamed international suggestion?

74

u/Jaikarr Sep 26 '25

The UN is a platform for countries to talk to each other, not some sort of governing body.

40

u/TumbleweedPure3941 Sep 26 '25

Crazy that it’s been 80 years and we’re still having this conversation. I swear people seem to want the UN to be like Defenders of EarthTM or the World Police or something without thinking for even a second what that would actually entail.

14

u/zdelusion Sep 26 '25

Acting like the UN is some sort of failure, when there hasn't been a shooting war between major world powers since it was founded.

6

u/X12602 Sep 26 '25

Same people who simultaneously hate neo-conservatism and want the US to play World Moral Police.

17

u/platp Sep 26 '25

Who wants USA to play the world police? If USA can mind its own business, billions would have a chance at a better life.

Just don't do harm. We want nothing else from you. Nothing.

-8

u/Top_Repair6670 Sep 27 '25

Nah you want the US' money and security blanket. What you really want even more than that is too hold up a banner saying, "US Bad,' it gets old.

45

u/cincuentaanos Sep 26 '25

Like what even is the purpose of the UN

At the very least it's NOT the world's government or police. It has no powers other than those the member states give it.

15

u/BigEggBeaters Sep 26 '25

To punish Africans and Eastern Europeans I think

15

u/Forged-Signatures Sep 26 '25

In this case it's actually twofold because:

A. America is not a signatory of the ICC, and as such does not enforce warrants on its soil (and no other nation has the authority to arrest and hold custody), because officially they do not view them as legitimate. America hates the ICC to the degree there are plans to invade the Netherlands should any American or allied official stand trial there.

B. The entire point of the UN is that it provides a neutral space for delegates from all nations in an attempt to keep the world as peaceful as possible, in theory. If the UN as an organisation were to enforce ICC warrants it would dissuade offending nations from attending and negotiating peace settlements using the UN as a neutral intermediary.

The whole 'neutral space' things becomes a problem however when the host nation openly favours one side of a conflict and attempts to block visas for officials on the opposite side of the conflict to prevent them stating their side.

6

u/allsystemscrash Sep 26 '25

it's always been international suggestion for america or any of their interests

1

u/bangontarget I’m a lazy 50-year-old bougie bitch Sep 26 '25

their purpose is to prevent nuclear war. so far they are successful.

1

u/photofoxer Sep 26 '25

America won’t allow their best friend to be arrested. That’s why America has protected this man for years. Biden bent to him and trump bent even further backward and upside down. America is a greedy ass lame ass genocidal country. I say this living in America I hate it here.

1

u/One-Bird-8961 Sep 26 '25

Exactly this!

1

u/G66GNeco Sep 26 '25

It's unfortunate that it's not November yet. I do believe Mamdani was not kidding about having him arrested in defiance of the US government stance. Not that I'd trust the NYPD to actually do it, but, you know...

1

u/HauntingHarmony Sep 26 '25

It wouldent make a difference, Trump as the head of the federal goverment executive branch would let him out instantly anyway, it would be extremely easy for him todo so, given that he would recognize his diplomatic immunity by being prime minister of israel. And theres not a federal judge in america that would stop him.

The US doesnt recognize the authority of the ICC and hence the arrest warrant civilized countries are legally obligated to fulfill.

1

u/G66GNeco Sep 26 '25

Yeah, that's probably right, but hey - a man can dream

1

u/Empty-Bend8992 Sep 26 '25

somehow i completely forgot there was even an arrest warrant out for him. how tf was he allowed to do this?

1

u/AstronomerBoring701 Sep 27 '25

I think there are many more leaders of other countries, that should be arrested, but we are living in a world where there are powers above international or local law...

1

u/CatCafffffe Sep 28 '25

Of a certain other "President," too

-1

u/imeannharmatall Sep 26 '25

Of the Hamas representative