Saturday, October 8, 2016

Russia Vetoes U.N. Security Council Resolution To Stop The Bombing Of The Syrian City Of Aleppo

Washington Post: Russia vetoes U.N. Security Council resolution to end Aleppo bombing

Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution on Saturday aimed at stopping the bombing in Aleppo as France warned that the city would be remembered as a place where civilians were “abandoned” to death.

It was the fifth time Moscow has used its veto in as many years as a deadlocked Security Council tries to end a war that has claimed almost half a million Syrian lives.

During that time, the warplanes of President Bashar al-
Assad have focused their might on the rebel-held suburbs of eastern Aleppo. More than 377 civilians have been killed there since the Sept. 19 breakdown of a truce brokered by the United States and Russia.

Barrel bombs, artillery attacks and cluster munitions have also targeted doctors and first responders pulling survivors from the rubble.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The Russians and the Syrian military are aiming for a military victory in Aleppo .... no UN resolutions that say otherwise,

More News On Russia Vetoing A U.N. Security Council Resolution To Stop The Bombing Of The Syria City Of Aleppo

Divided UN council fails to act to 'save Aleppo' -- AFP
Russia vetoes U.N. demand for end to bombing of Syria's Aleppo -- Reuters
Russia Blocks Aleppo Cease-fire Resolution at UN -- VOA
Russia vetoes UN resolution to halt Aleppo airstrikes -- CNN
Russia blocks UN move to stop Aleppo bombing -- DW
Russia vetoes UN resolution to stop bombing of Aleppo -- The Guardian
U.N. Security Council Fails to Agree on New Aleppo Cease-Fire -- WSJ
Russia vetoes UN resolution to end bombing in Aleppo dividing Security Council -- The Independent
Syria's war: UN Security Council votes on Aleppo -- Al Jazeera


Jac said...

Russia is among many other countries which are taking advantage of the few remaining months of the Obama administration. On his last presidential days Obama is weaker than ever.

Jay Farquharson said...

The only UNSC resolution that allows military action in Syria, with out the permission of the Syrian Government, requires that ISIS and al Quida and their allies, are the only legitimate targets.

The US's Phoney War against ISIS and al Quida has been utterly exposed.

RRH said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
RRH said...


And any attacks on the SAA and its allies within Syria will be a violation of her sovereignty and an act of war.

Stephen Davenport said...

This in a nut shell shows what is wrong with the UN. It is corrupt, that allows bad actors such as Russia to run amok with impunity because all they have to do is veto anything in the security council. IMO the US should leave the UN unless there are major reforms to how the UN operates. They would one year to reform after that, we leave the UN and the UN is kicked off US soil. The UN is worthless and corrupt.

Unknown said...

Is Stephan some immature troll? Or does he really beleive the USA is out here to help Syria? Stop following NY times and Fox News. Do some research

Aizino Smith said...

Nothing like disenfranchising the majority Sunni at the expense of the Alwawite.

But Leftist dogma be damned, when another Leftists goal is in sight.

Jay Farquharson said...

70% of the SAA and SAAF is Sunni.
All of the PSDF are Sunni.

Assad got 85% of the vote in the last elections, 87% of the vote amongst the refugee's, including those in the West.

Nothing like holding 22 million Syrians hostage to protect the West's tiny remaining handfulls of the Jihadi Head Choppers Brigaides.

Aizino Smith said...

Leaders in totalitarian countries often get 90% of more of the vote?

Shocker that Assad got so much of the vote.

Assad versus Al Qaeda or Assad versus ISIS is not much of a choice.

The FSA is too small to be a choice.

The MB versus Assad and after 3 or 4 election cycles I can see the MB getting 40%.

Oh wait the MB is not allowed to be in Syria.

Jay Farquharson said...

3 way ballot, the US's is what, 2?

In the US amongst Syrian Refugee's and Expat's, Assad got 87% of the 22,578 votes.

We know that the US only approves of the results of all foreign elections, no matter how democratic and well monitored, if they approve of the results.

The MB is banned in Syria for the same sort of reasons the Nazi Party is banned in Germany. The MB for the 25,000 Syrians they killed in their terrorist campaign called the Islamic Revolt of the '80's, the Nazi Party for WWII and the Holocaust.

Keep showing your love for jihadi terrorists, Anzino, it's a very American Value these days.

>>"The French and Spanish text that would have had the Council demand an immediate halt to all aerial bombardments and military flights over the city of Aleppo received 11 affirmative votes, two abstentions (Angola and China), and two negative votes (Russian Federation and Venezuela)."

"The Russian Federation’s text, by which the Council would have urged an immediate cessation of hostilities, particularly in Aleppo, received a vote of 4 in favour (China, Egypt, Russian Federation, Venezuela) to 9 against (France, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States), with 2 abstentions (Angola and Uruguay)."

"That draft resolution [by Russia] would have demanded that all parties prevent material and financial support from reaching groups associated with Al-Qaida, Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/Da’esh) or Jabhat al-Nusrah."<<

Jay Farquharson said...

There are 3 UN's.

There is the UN Committees, Agencies and Councils, that eradicate disease, save refugee's, teaches children, brings clean drinking water to millions, rescues orphans, saves the starving. The US doesn't contribute much to this.

There is the UN General Assembly, which is a Global Parliament, where when they are screwing up, the Great Powers don't fare very well in votes, but other than "managing" the Commitees, Agencies and Councils, doesn't have the power to impose anything on anybody.

Then there is the UN Security Council. It's basically run by the "winners" of WWII, and it's "purpose" is to maintain the Global Power Status Quo.

But you are right, the US should quit the UN, all forms of it.

Of course, the UN would never let the US back in, and very quickly, the Global Alignment would be "everybody in the world" vs. The US.

Blogger said...

Did you know that that you can make money by locking special sections of your blog or site?
To start just join AdscendMedia and implement their Content Locking widget.