I’m curious about why Paraguay, Malawi, and Papua New Guinea voted against.
These small island countries that consistently echo Washington’s unpopular votes in the UN are essentially unofficial US colonies, and mostly use the US dollar or Australian dollar as their currencies. Together, the six have a combined population of just over 1 million people, making them some of the smallest nations on Earth.
(I should note that Malawi is actually pretty close to the median size of a UN member nation — driving from one end of the country to the other could take you a whole day.)
(Another thing to note, for the heck of it, is that the combined populations of Paraguay, Malawi, and Papua New Guinea is about 39 million people. Just over half of these would live in Malawi, and about two-thirds of the remainder would live in Papua New Guinea.)
They should end it now
nothing will be done unless the UN kicks out the UK/US/Israel and declares war
Wow now they have no choice, I’m sure this will stop them.
Its nice some countries are finally on record as against genocide and occupation, but it is decades late. Also this doesn’t change shit, this is just nations “virtue signaling” (idk if this term is too chud-coded, but it fits) to their populaces.
Sorry if this is super pessimistic.
Liberals live in a world of pure aesthetics. They want to harvest all the power and consent an idea or cause can buy them without expensing any of the actual political capital (and regular capital) required to actually achieve the cause.
Terms like virtue signaling and concern trolling describe liberals perfectly. It’s just that chuds would have you throw out the virtue with the bath water.
On the one hand, fuck yeah. On the other hand, a “demand” from the UN is toothless as long as keeps supplying and endorsing the genocide.
