Interesting take by Alex Krainer that it's actually an assault on European trade with the far East dressed up as support for Israel. Much like Nordstream was a US assault on German industrial capacity dressed up as an attack on Russian gas exports.
Is independent media closing in on mainstream hang ups with attention-getting sensation? Glenn Diesen, your common sense thoughts on the dearth of exemplary examples, effective interventions, functional solutions and plausible alternatives, civics instruction, opportunities for public participation and activism and the like?
As comments illustrate, don't we tend to absorb and respond or react within the boundaries we're presented? How often are Jan Oberg, Dr. Ralph Wilde, Chuck Marohn, Joe Minicozzi, Kate Raworth and their like invited to expand those boundaries, help us step outside those boxes? What to do?
So? That's hardly the perspective of Yemen. And in this case one solution is clear and simple, and involves doing nothing but reminding others of our obligation to follow the ICJ reminder that doing nothing in this case is law.
Among its other obligations, Israel must leave Occupied Palestine, and UN member states must not assist its remaining. Dr. Ralph Wilde explains the historical and legal foundations here,
This is elegant in how relatively little each of us needs to do to stop this atrocity we willingly gnash our teeth over daily. . . although we do need to remind our representatives that in a democratic republic their obligation is to breathe some life into real law as expressed in the UN Charter, " . . . to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest . . . "
Common Interest. Hmm. One would think this glaring contradiction between deeds and words (the US and west did sign the charter) would be great media fodder. but where are those headlines even in independent media? It doesn't seem like rocket science, so what am I missing?
I just learned we're in the middle of Israeli Apartheid Week 2025. Re BDS "This isn’t a choice but an ethical and legal duty. Ending direct and indirect complicity with Israel is a legal obligation for all states, following the ICJ decisions in 2024.”
Especially in USA states with anti-BDS laws that fly in the face of international law and the ICJ Case 186 opinion that UN member states need to follow law, if there's public news or discussion I'm missing it. For a rule of law country of laws isn't this a contradiction in the nature of a faceplant worthy of headlines?
For the last 30 years USA military policy in the middle east has been set by Israel. No mystery there then about why Yemen
For Israel of course
A mistake? 🤣 Don’t think so.
It just indicates someone didn’t quite understand who’s got the real power in Washington DC and pulled the trigger.
Getting to be the same round of Napolitano people over and over. Ugh. There are only a few that have anything new to say ever.
Interesting take by Alex Krainer that it's actually an assault on European trade with the far East dressed up as support for Israel. Much like Nordstream was a US assault on German industrial capacity dressed up as an attack on Russian gas exports.
Is independent media closing in on mainstream hang ups with attention-getting sensation? Glenn Diesen, your common sense thoughts on the dearth of exemplary examples, effective interventions, functional solutions and plausible alternatives, civics instruction, opportunities for public participation and activism and the like?
As comments illustrate, don't we tend to absorb and respond or react within the boundaries we're presented? How often are Jan Oberg, Dr. Ralph Wilde, Chuck Marohn, Joe Minicozzi, Kate Raworth and their like invited to expand those boundaries, help us step outside those boxes? What to do?
So? That's hardly the perspective of Yemen. And in this case one solution is clear and simple, and involves doing nothing but reminding others of our obligation to follow the ICJ reminder that doing nothing in this case is law.
Among its other obligations, Israel must leave Occupied Palestine, and UN member states must not assist its remaining. Dr. Ralph Wilde explains the historical and legal foundations here,
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/laws/sites/laws/files/ralph_wilde_palestine_policy_brief.pdf
and Craig Mokhiber describes this application here,
https://mondoweiss.net/2024/08/the-icj-finds-that-bds-is-not-merely-a-right-but-an-obligation/
This is elegant in how relatively little each of us needs to do to stop this atrocity we willingly gnash our teeth over daily. . . although we do need to remind our representatives that in a democratic republic their obligation is to breathe some life into real law as expressed in the UN Charter, " . . . to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest . . . "
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text
Common Interest. Hmm. One would think this glaring contradiction between deeds and words (the US and west did sign the charter) would be great media fodder. but where are those headlines even in independent media? It doesn't seem like rocket science, so what am I missing?
Same as the last half century: for the «motherland».
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2024/us-spending-israel-s-military-operations-and-related-us-operations-region-least-2276
As long as it takes, an no matter what it costs in innocent lives, reputation, or money:
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/BudgetaryCosts
I just learned we're in the middle of Israeli Apartheid Week 2025. Re BDS "This isn’t a choice but an ethical and legal duty. Ending direct and indirect complicity with Israel is a legal obligation for all states, following the ICJ decisions in 2024.”
https://israel-academia-monitor.com/2025/03/26/israeli-apartheid-week-2025-and-20th-anniversary-of-bds/
Especially in USA states with anti-BDS laws that fly in the face of international law and the ICJ Case 186 opinion that UN member states need to follow law, if there's public news or discussion I'm missing it. For a rule of law country of laws isn't this a contradiction in the nature of a faceplant worthy of headlines?
The law in most countries is but a cudgel used by the powerful to batter the rest. Not least in the world’s biggest plantation nation.
Somehow my reply got stuck in its own comment. Please browse.