It seems when two or more nations go to war, the question that arises most of the time at the Security Council in the United Nations, the UN, it's about who is the most aggressive and how to intervene to solve the problem.
That certainly is a good thing and demonstrates the UN is working as designed, solving conflicts between nations.
But why is it those in control to determine what the problem actually is becomes unclear the more the debate goes on. What is the best way to bring the factions to the table to work out the problem.
That is, just how to bring the waring nations together in a natural environment to solve the conflict always has a problem of just identifying who is at fault of starting the war in the first place. What is the history of the combatants and (who has the most to lose).
And so the UN has decided in its infinite wisdom, the Israeli conflict with the Palestinas leadership, the organization called Hammas, in a Israeli territory called Gaza, who attacked the Israelis killing, murdering 1400 innocent civilians.
But the UN says the Israelis are the most powerful and therefore must now use more common sense in finding a way to compromise to end the conflict.
And why the UN has decided it needs to intervene with a secondary force of ''peacekeepers'' to end the dominance of one nation over a struggling people who say they are oppressed and just want to be free. That makes a lot of sense.
Does it really matter how it started, what's important is how to end the destruction of war.
The problem solved. Stop the bloodshed, come together, discuss the problem. Find a solution.
The UN works!
No comments:
Post a Comment