Russia VETOES UN resolution regarding Syria chemical attacks

[Morphine Prince 110,019]

 

 

[Born To Slay 10,996]

How can Russia alone veto it? Do the countries not vote?

[Blackwillow 2,200]

Mess 

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

5 minutes ago, Born To Slay said:

How can Russia alone veto it? Do the countries not vote?

Russia has a permanent seat on the UNSC, it only takes one veto from a member with a permanent seat for it to take effect.

- 

This was completely expected, Russia would never allow UN intervention in Syria. Just like it has vetoed every other attempt of intervention to date. 

[Born To Slay 10,996]

Just now, Saint Laurent said:

Russia has a permanent seat on the UNSC, it only takes one veto from a member with a permanent seat for it to take effect.

That's stupid 

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

4 minutes ago, Born To Slay said:

That's stupid 

Kind of makes sense though, if Russia's vote was disregarded, the whole thing would escalate to World War level.

The 5 permanent seats are hold by those who 'won' WWII, since it is perceived that they are the most powerful nations and are 'protecting the peace' of the world in some way. Clearly this is false, but it's the law so.

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

There is precedent for intervention to still take place though, despite Russia's veto. It would just have to be without UNSC authorisation.

If the situation becomes worse, this will likely happen.

[Born To Slay 10,996]

1 minute ago, Saint Laurent said:

Kind of makes sense though, if Russia's vote was disregarded, the whole thing would escalate to World War level.

The 5 permanent seats are hold by those who 'won' WWII, since it is perceived that they are the most powerful nations and are 'protecting the peace' of the world in some way. Clearly this is false, but it's the law so.

I don't like how one nation can veto, I think there should be a way to override the veto.

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

1 minute ago, Born To Slay said:

I don't like how one nation can veto, I think there should be a way to override the veto.

There kind of is, NATO has been known to act without UNSC authorisation. There has been little consequence when this has happened before, but the situation would have to become far worse.

In other instances millions have died.

[lego 44,165]

Shocking.  

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Born To Slay said:

I don't like how one nation can veto, I think there should be a way to override the veto.

 

This is what the US does for Israel ALL THE TIME. Just one example. 

That's why this was big news

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/430f1f3c6f6f404f87e90cfdb0032b1c/official-israel-turned-trump-head-un-resolution

 

 

 

Check this list

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vetos_exercised_by_the_US_government_in_the_UN_Security_Council

 

[Laceface 2,964]

No surprise to be honest, predictable

[littlepotter 76,625]

23 minutes ago, Saint Laurent said:

Russia has a permanent seat on the UNSC, it only takes one veto from a member with a permanent seat for it to take effect.

- 

This was completely expected, Russia would never allow UN intervention in Syria. Just like it has vetoed every other attempt of intervention to date. 

I never understood this system

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

6 minutes ago, littlepotter said:

I never understood this system

Why?

[En_Sabah_Nur 9,366]

34 minutes ago, Saint Laurent said:

Kind of makes sense though, if Russia's vote was disregarded, the whole thing would escalate to World War level.

The 5 permanent seats are hold by those who 'won' WWII, since it is perceived that they are the most powerful nations and are 'protecting the peace' of the world in some way. Clearly this is false, but it's the law so.

But France is a permanent member & they were conquered/occupied during WWII??!??  

And China wasn't even involved during WWII, if I remember correctly...  

 

 

[Saint Laurent 4,862]

1 minute ago, En_Sabah_Nur said:

But France is a permanent member & they were conquered/occupied during WWII??!??  

And China wasn't even involved during WWII, if I remember correctly...  

 

 

France was liberated during WWII and was on the side of the victors, hence their permanent seat.

You're very wrong about China actually. China fought Japan for 15 years during the wars and lost a lot of men doing so (14 million I believe?), hence their permanent seat.

The remaining 3 are fairly obvious.