ozimoron

This was a security council vote. I believe Israel is not currently on the security council. It would be a travesty if it was.

Nearly 70 former U.S. officials, diplomats and military officers on Wednesday urged President Joe Biden to warn Israel of serious consequences if it denies civil rights and basic necessities to Palestinians and expands settlement activity in the occupied West Bank. "The United States must be willing to take concrete action to oppose" such practices, the group said in an open letter to Biden, "including restrictions on provision of (U.S.) assistance (to Israel) consistent with U.S. law and policy." Among the signatories were more than a dozen former ambassadors, as well as other retired State Department officials and former Pentagon, intelligence and White House officials, including Anthony Lake, a national security adviser to former President Bill Clinton. https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2024-03-20/dozens-of-former-u-s-officials-urge-biden-to-take-harder-line-with-israel

“There are good reasons why US law prohibits arms support for governments that block life-saving aid or violate international law with US weapons,” said Sarah Yager, Washington director at Human Rights Watch. “Given ongoing hostilities in Gaza, the Israeli government’s assurances to the Biden administration that it is meeting US legal requirements are not credible.” NSM-20 establishes that foreign security partners such as Israel submit assurances to the Departments of State and Defense that they are not arbitrarily blocking US humanitarian assistance and not violating international humanitarian law. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/03/19/israeli-assurances-use-us-arms-legally-are-not-credible

Do you have a l;ink? My understanding is that it's the law to prevent asset stripping which is precisely what Trump would do since he needs the billions.

I answered your questions. You never answer questions with a direct answer as put to you. I'll not grace your objections further and just leave it to others to decide how they interpret that sentence. After all, my primary target for commenting is not you since the list of questions unanswered by you would require a forest to print.

"That’s odd. Trump told me he wiped ISIS off the planet," wrote legal and political commentator Bradley P. Moss, an expert in national security. https://www.rawstory.com/trump-isis-planet-mocked/

What then did the sentence really mean? Just a throw away and that both issues carried equal weight?

As I said, that's my interpretation of what that sentence means. Without that interpretation the sentence would have no point. Read the sentence in the context of those around it.

Joe Biden does not want to be the man who stopped arming Israel, not least because that would leave the country vulnerable to the mighty arsenal of Hezbollah just across the northern border with Lebanon. I can interpret that as I see fit. The purpose of that sentence is to assert the major reason is the threat from Hezbollah, otherwise it would have no point. As is your usual MO, you reject any nuance at all and revert to pedantry.

"What's important to note is that the United States has changed its position, and shown its will to defend, very clearly now, a ceasefire," Mr Macron said. "For a long time, the Americans were reticent. That reticence is now gone." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68627272

Try reading the link?

Show me where I said that.

The US still needs to certify that declaration. It isn't automatic on Israel's say so. The reason the US is reluctant to stop weapons transfer to Israel is the threat of Hezbollah, not support for Israel's bombing of Palestinians.

In defying Joe Biden, Benjamin Netanyahu is exposing the limits of US power The Israeli PM’s refusal to heed US demands on food aid for Gaza is morally indefensible, hurting the president – and opening the door to Donald Trump Last month, he issued a new protocol, demanding those countries that receive US arms affirm in writing that they abide by international law, including on humanitarian aid. If the US doesn’t certify that declaration, all arms sales stop immediately. In Israel’s case, the deadline for certification is Sunday. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/22/joe-biden-benjamin-netanyahu-israel-gaza-donald-trump

Why did Russia and China veto? The Russian deputy ambassador to the UN, Dmitry Polyanskiy, warned reporters on Thursday: “We are not satisfied with anything which doesn’t call for an immediate ceasefire.” After the vote, he said: “At the coordination stage, almost all security council members expressed the view that the demand for an immediate ceasefire should not be conditional on the release of hostages or the condemnation of Hamas.” Explaining Guyana’s abstention, the South American country’s representative Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett said: “Contrary to media reports, this resolution does not call for an immediate ceasefire.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/22/us-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-explainer

Can we not turn this into another antivax crusade if that's your intention? It isn't covid.

Kushner pushing a genocide narrataive.

Again, true, but it was an unnecessary setback.

That's true. If the ceasefire had taken effect the hostages might be released soon er rather than later. As it is there's not much hope.

From ‘I Love You’ to ‘<deleted>’: How Joe Gave Up on Bibi After decades of building a “close, personal” friendship with Benjamin Netanyahu, Joe Biden has had it with the Israeli prime minister. Now he’s hitting him hard — and it may be working. Obama wanted a freeze on construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank to avoid depriving the Palestinians of land for a future state as U.S. special envoy George Mitchell restarted Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. But upon Biden’s arrival, Netanyahu’s government suddenly announced the construction of 1,600 new Israeli apartments in the disputed territory. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/03/22/biden-netanyahu-friendship-pressure-campaign-00148328

He'll be released under the prisoner / hostage exchange agreement.

Rubbish. Hamas were credibly accused of terrorism long before Netanyahu embarked on his cynical campaign of divide and conquer. He incorrectly reasoned that empowering Hamas would delegitimise the PLO and give him an excuse to not have to negotiate with the PLO. His miscalculation was considering that Hamas would never be able to conduct an attack on the scale at which they did. Netanyahu bears a great deal of responsibility for enabling the Hamas attack by his desire to avoid a negotiated settlement.

The draft being put to a vote “determines” — which is a council order — “the imperative of an immediate and sustained cease-fire,” with no direct link to the release of hostages taken during Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel, which was in the previous draft. But it would unequivocally support diplomatic efforts “to secure such a cease-fire in connection with the release of all remaining hostages.” https://apnews.com/article/united-nations-us-vote-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-f6453803b3eacc9fbaa2ce5a025e2a94 So, 2 things. Those who insisted that Blinken didn't mean a permanant ceasefire were flat out wrong. And, why did the US veto previous resolutions for a ceasefire that the rest of the world knew was the right course of action only to turn around and reverse course when it became apparent that Israel were never going to abide by the orders of the ICJ.

I asked you a question. Make your position crystal clear.