Zimbabwe Sanctions vetoed

[Matt]

UN SANCTIONS VOTE
FOR
Belgium
Burkina Faso
Costa Rica
Croatia
France
Italy
Panama
UK
United States
AGAINST
China
Libya
Russia
South Africa
Vietnam
ABSTAINED
Indonesia

Expect nothing less from the Russians and the Libyans to be honest, but its nice to finally see South African nailing thier "colours" to the mast and showing the whole world just what they are about in this day and age.

Also the Chinese?? Not the best way to bring eyes on you before you are about to host what is supposed to be the biggest sporting event on the planet? Do they even care?

[DJ]

Sorry for being totally ignorant to this UN Sanctions stuff but what exactly does the list represent? I'm thinking that the countries in the FOR section are those that are going to try to do something against Mugabe's regime? And those AGAINST are those who think that the situation is best left alone. Other than that I'm not entirely sure what's what with the list inspite of listening to Radio 5 a lot and hearing details about what is going on and seeing the odd bit in the paper.

[AJ]

South Africa is always going to vote no to anything that causees a flood of refugees over their own border. It's blatant self interest.

The whole concept of the veto is a joke, the US uses it all the time to protect israel from action.

[WASP]

I can't believe we allow these 3rd world countries a vote

[bartonbank]

Originally Posted by AJ

South Africa is always going to vote no to anything that causees a flood of refugees over their own border. It's blatant self interest.

The whole concept of the veto is a joke, the US uses it all the time to protect israel from action.

Every country on the security council has used the veto in the past...and the moment the UK doesn't act in self interest we will all be on here banging on about it.

[AJ]

but why should these five countries (UK,US,Russia, France and China) have a veto and permnent membership of the council?

In the past they were the only nuclear powers and that was why they got it.

Should pakistan or isreal have seat and a veto ?

Whole organisation is a walking corpse, needs major reform and a review of it's purpose

[A-Team]

Originally Posted by bartonbank

Every country on the security council has used the veto in the past...and the moment the UK doesn't act in self interest we will all be on here banging on about it.

Since 1984 (after the soviets stopped going nuts with the vetos) the yanks have used the veto in relation to Israel more times than the rest of the council combined has used vetos on anything.

Not sure what good economic sanctions would really do. In the case of Iraq he deaths of children attributable to sanctions is estimated in the hundreds of thousands and half a million is a sort of midddle of the road estimate.
Didn't exactly do Sadam a world of harm though.

Seems more like a way for the west to feel smug and brush the issue under the carpet while pretending to take decisive action.

[Cassius Marcellus]

Programme on last night about the chinese flogging arms and war vehicles to Sudan, who use them in Darfur.

Got no money for food, but got plenty for war.

When they're all dead, who are the char-idees gonna help out?

I need a few quid, gardener and cook haven't been paid for ages, caviare stocks are low and the cellar is bereft of champagne. Even the peacocks on the lawns are getting pissed off with it.