![It's what they want. [1000x1000 - 236KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/YvnfTT.jpg){kind=link}
Iraq was a regional power which was at war with iran at some point, a lot of middle eastern powers had an interest in reducing iraq's influence in the region, but not to the point of engaging in a full blown military confrontation with it
France opposed the military invasion of iraq, a lot of country did and paid a high price for that, all members of the UN btw
I'm telling you, facts go against your narrative once again
The UN never supported the military invasion of iraq, there's no debate to have about that, it's a fact.
And saddam hussein wasn't exactly an angel btw https://pic8.co/sh/TamPXB.jpeg
The un put sanctions against iraq. They did Israel’s bidding. Rothschilds fund both United Nations and created israel
Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: “We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?” Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.” --60 Minutes (5/12/96)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel
>The following is a list of United Nations resolutions concerning Israel. As of 2013, Israel had been condemned in 45 resolutions by the United Nations Human Rights Council. Since the creation of the Council in 2006, it has resolved almost more resolutions condemning Israel than on the rest of the world combined. The 45 resolutions comprised almost half (45.9%) of all country-specific resolutions passed by the Council, not counting those under Agenda Item 10 (countries requiring technical assistance).[1] From 1967 to 1989 the UN Security Council adopted 131 resolutions directly addressing the Arab–Israeli conflict. In early Security Council practice, resolutions did not directly invoke Chapter VII. They made an explicit determination of a threat, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, and ordered an action in accordance with Article 39 or 40. Resolution 54 determined that a threat to peace existed within the meaning of Article 39 of the Charter, reiterated the need for a truce, and ordered a cease-fire pursuant to Article 40 of the Charter. Although the phrase "Acting under Chapter VII" was never mentioned as the basis for the action taken, the chapter's authority was being used.[2]
>The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a number of resolutions saying that the strategic relationship with the United States encourages Israel to pursue aggressive and expansionist policies and practices.[3] The 9th Emergency Session of the General Assembly was convened at the request of the Security Council when the United States blocked efforts to adopt sanctions against Israel.[4] The United States responded to the frequent criticism from UN organs by adopting the Negroponte doctrine of opposing any Security Council resolutions criticizing Israel that did not also denounce Palestinian militant activity.
Now what?
Narrative collapse, that's what
It's only because israel has the military, diplomatic and financial backing of the US that it can shield itself against the UN and pretty much anything else
It's definitely NOT because the UN is vastly pro israel
And I'm only stating the obvious here
Sanctions mean nothing if they are carried without action. The un still does Israel’s bidding even as it denounces israel
(post is archived)