top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 143 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Its always those two for any attempt to improve human rights rules

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 73 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Oh come on now. Russia and China are usually in there as well

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Suspicious username, but you are actually right.

    „Why is it always you four…?“

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    I feel like I shouldn't say this aloud so as to not give them any ideas but why is it that the people woth names like 'yourfriendlyMI5handler' and 'CIAgentinyourwalls' are usually the least glowy accounts but you find someone like 'casualdejekyll' is visible from space?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

    What you saying I’m not glowy??? What’s your location? Never mind I already know your location! And what you ate for breakfast, and that your password is your great aunt Sheryl’s birthday + the letters “globludoo!@@“

    Also, dude, that porn is pretty vanilla, you gotta up your game, branch out a bit,

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 43 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

    This is why no country should have veto power. The USA and Israel have held back the UN from fulfilling its promise for...ever, really. China, Russia, and other have pitched in to fuck up good things from time to time but it's usually the big two war god worshipping nations.

    When a religion is based on worshipping a god of war, don't be surprised when they're violent; physically, mentally, verbally, politically...

    Edit: as pointed out in a reply: Israel has no veto power.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago*

    From my research.

    This wasn't a UN vote. It was a committee vote on whether to bring it to the assembly or not. Obviously if the US is against it then there's no reason to have a vote.

    Also it wasn't really making food a right for your citizens, it was about using starvation as a war tactic.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 39 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    AKA Israel and Israel-lite

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 53 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    The plot twist here is that Israel is actually US-lite. Israel is commiting its genocide in an effort to steal native land, the US completed its genocidal land acquisition long ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 32 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    is torture bad

    was the african slave trade bad

    is nazism bad

    are Palestinians human beings

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    is nazism bad

    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2022/11/09/why-france-and-51-other-countries-voted-against-the-un-resolution-condemning-nazism_6003471_8.html

    In the context of the war in Ukraine – and with Russia justifying its invasion, which began on 24 February, by the desire to "denazify" the country – many states that had previously abstained decided to vote against the resolution this year.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    There’s a country that was planted somewhere it didn’t belong, murdered the people already living there, and claimed the land as its own… and then there’s its ally, Israel

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    It's always those two. But hey, don't you ever dare saying so because you'll always find someone who goes either "But not all americans!!!!" Or "OMG! Antisemitism!!!!!".

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 12 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    That's not really harsh. I knew thus shit since the day I was 5 and watched Israel kill children on TV in 2002/2003

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 11 points 1 week ago*

    That's what I would have expected.
    US: "human rights are a commodity, and you get them if you have the money."
    Israel: "The natives aren't humans. And we humans have food, so no declaration needed."
    One is the Ferengi nation. The other is a classic Apartheid state.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Shocker! The country that can't even agree to give children free lunches in schools voted that food isn't a human right? I'm more and more shameful of my country by the second.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago
    [–] 7 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Here's a harsh reality people need to understand.

    Israel is NOT the US's rabid dog.

    Israel owns US politicians.

    Israel is taking over US media

    Israel is working to forcibly integrate the US's military into its own

    Israel has dragged the US into multiple illegal wars of aggression against it's regional opponents

    Israel is training ICE, the US gestapo

    Israel is selling spyware to the US to spy on Americans.

     

    Israel isn't the US's rabid dog.

    Israel is COLONIZING the USA

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 6 points 1 week ago

    Bro, when Eritrea and fucking Afghanistan declare food a human right, but not fucking America?????

    Yeah, America is fucked.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago*

    Look, you can't make profitable things a "right", that just leads to lower profits becsuse pesky regulations around what people "have a right to".

    /s

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    Glad to not see the usual excuses here when this is mentioned saying nonsense about "trying to force us to pay".

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    should have declared it anyway

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago

    This was a vote in the General Assembly, where no country has a veto. It's one of the only institutions in the world where one can gauge global sentiments instead of what "the international community" has decided. The veto is in the security council, where the powerful countries that make up "the international community" rule over everyone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›