US Election & Presidency

Think they've chosen enough "Strange" as it is.

Egypt put forward a UN resolution opposing Trump's actions over Jerusalem.

14 UN countries agreed with it.

The US vetoed it, predictably:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-42394264

And if you want to petition the US government about that, well, guess what? now you can't:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42409634

^ The US veto was expected. The next step is to take it to the UN General Assembly where no such veto exists and a simple majority would be an indication that the world is against the action the US took. Separately a conference of Muslim states has responded to the USA by declaring East Jerusalem as the future capital of the Palestinian state.

A General Assembly resolution isn't legally binding whereas a Security Council resolution would have been.
So it will make no difference.

And I doubt if it had been made legally binding by Security Council (Of which the US IS a permanent member of & Egypt is non permanent which expires this year), there is every chance Trump would use it's veto anyway to get round it. Incidentally how many veto's are members allowed on votes?

(20-12-2017 06:42 )The Silent Majority Wrote:  A General Assembly resolution isn't legally binding whereas a Security Council resolution would have been.
So it will make no difference.

Yeah I appreciate that - it's really the symbolic nature of it that the world says that they disagree with the USA. Sad how in less than a year the "leader of the free world" has become so tarnished.

(20-12-2017 07:31 )SecretAgent Wrote:  Sad how in less than a year the "leader of the free world" has become so tarnished.

Now now, his critics felt he was tarnished within about 30 seconds

(20-12-2017 08:21 )Doddle Wrote:  

(20-12-2017 07:31 )SecretAgent Wrote:  Sad how in less than a year the "leader of the free world" has become so tarnished.

Now now, his critics felt he was tarnished within about 30 seconds

He was always tarnished. Tarnishing the office he now holds has been more gradual.

You'll find plenty of people who felt Hillary was tarnished.

And Obama.

And Dubya.

And so on.

There hasn't been a tarnish-free US President for decades, if ever.

Maybe, but he's taken it to a whole new level.