What is the value of being on the security council if not to help shape their belief of what should be condemned? I am okay with that – them wanting Israel condemned for incursions into Gaza – but those condemnations shouldn’t go unanswered, with no condemnations of the hurling of rockets into Israel by the same.

And then – when I write that, when you read that – don’t you see – because I do – the pointlessness of such condemnations anyway – what do they really accomplish?

I know – I just did a Tevye but that’s what that part of the world is like – we cannot be pawns too and do this condemnation dance.

I am not an opponent of the UN, but in this sense, it really makes you wonder what value it serves, if their efforts have such little impact.

I was in the Navy when Mumar drew his “line of death” across the Gulf of Sidra. I know he isn’t a saint.

3. Libya just won its seat on the U.N. Security Council in October. It took 4 years of kissing major international butt to get that position. They also are making major economic advances due to the lifting of decades of sanctions. Blocking the unanimous passage of this resolution will cost them.

2. Just last year, the U.S. vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution criticizing Israel for launching a Nov. 8 missile strike that killed 18 civilians in the town of Beit Hanoun. The U.N. General Assembly passed their condemnation 156-7 on November 18th.

1. Do you honestly think the U.S. would not veto a resolution presented by Libya to condemn Israel for their incursions into Gaza?

1. Libya can make the proposal separately. Why must it be attached? They are on the council – let them propose what they believe should be a condemnation.

2. Who says there can be no condemnation of Israel or that it isn’t allowed? I am not aware of the failure of such attempts, but let’s look at that before we say that they aren’t allowed.

3. “Risked” its status? Why do you say they risked it?

Craig – I don’t know our ages relative to one another, but let me just say that I have a very close friend who grew up in Libya for several years. (She’s Catholic but converted to Episcopal when she got married.) She lived in Tripoli in the late 1960s and 1970s. Her dad sold parts for oil rigs. Her parents were prevented from leaving the country in the 1980s and there property was seized but eventually they left. I am curious to know if you are aware of how our country has and our corporations have tangled with Libya and Libya’s treatment of our ex-pats, among others.

I ask this because I think you are being a bit naive and cavalier about Libya. It’s a brazen country – I doubt they see their hope for including certain condemnations as a risk at all.

“The Libyans wanted to include in the statement language condemning the recent Israeli incursions into Gaza, which have killed over 120 Palestinians, many of them civilians.
Khalilzad rejected the move, arguing that killing students in a school was different from the unintentional killing of civilians.”

No condemnation of Israel is allowed because their killing of imprisoned civilians was somehow justified. I don’t think the Palestinians see that way.
Don’t you find it interesting that the terrorist nation of Libya risked its newly aquired status to try and have that included in the resolution? It was definitely not in their own self-interest to take such a stand.

Thanks for reading and commenting as calmly as you do, seriously.