RE: The UN

The point with Syria was that a country which is known for actively supporting terrorism, can be a temporary member in the Security Council, and can influence decisions there. UN regulations do not allow nations involved in acts of aggression to take a temprorary seat in the Council. And then in the newspapers it’s always reported that a UN Security Council resolution ‘calling on Israel yada yada yada …’ was blocked by a US veto, as if the US is wrong when taking such a measure. When you look at which countries actually preside in the Council, one can only laugh. Did you know Israel is the only country in the UN that can’t get a temporary seat in the Security Council?

As for the UN after 1956: the mandate was something like preventing the two sides from fighting. Well, when one side chose it wanted to fight, the UN immedtiately pulled back it’s troops to make room for the Egyptian troops. But when Israel defended itself with a pre-emptive strike, guess who was condemned for aggression?