People are smart enough to see that, and it's clear you think about this enough to know exactly what you're doing by bemoaning the lack of security council censure of China, and it cheapens our cause to have behavior like that affiliated it with it.
Tell me what you're claiming and what metric or some objective method we should use to measure your claim. I'm claiming Israel is picked on in the UN disproportionately. I can't even tell from your reply what's your position on this topic.
I wouldn't call myself a Zionist. I'm an (ex-)Israeli. The right of the Jewish people to live in Israel is an axiom for me. It's ridiculous that's debated. It's a fact and Israel is not going away.
I think your point is maybe don't use China as an excuse. That's maybe fair enough. But it's not the topic. I'm not debating whether Israel should have a pass for genocide because China does, I'm debating whether Israel is disproportionately attacked which is what I would consider antisemitism. This claim can be debated independently of the other multiple things there are to debate here. Israel should not have free pass to do anything and it should also not be subjected to the lynch mob it's being subjected to, these are not mutually exclusive.
How can a security council resolution be blocked?
Who is on the Security Council?
If you just don't know the basics of what you're talking about, my apologies, not a troll, just ignorant, opinionated, and willing to claim anything and everything for your argument, and make others do the work of explaining why the refs aren't rigged while you weaponize dead bodies to make your argument for it
UN Security Council resolutions against China is technically a dumb example on my side but my original statement you called a lie was:
> We can measure "unjustly singled out" fairly well.
> How much condemnation from the UN has China received for what it's doing to the Uyghurs?
> How many times has the UN security council discussed that vs. discussions related to Israel?
You googled that and found it's a lie. That means China was discussed more times? (veto isn't relevant to this question) The UN has otherwise condemned China (veto isn't relevant to that either) more times than Israel? What exactly is the lie here?
The US vetoes some/most security council resolutions against Israel. And sure, China can and will veto resolutions against itself. So that is your counter argument? As I said, you pick the metric. How many vetoed resolutions were there against Israel and how many against China? How many meetings to discuss these issues? If the security council wants to make a statement, as it seems to want to do endlessly against the US and Israel, then certainly it can keep bringing proposals and let China veto them, right?
What about the general assembly? China has no vetoes there.
I picked China off the top of my head as one of an infinite list of severe human rights violations that the UN shrugs off. Maybe it wasn't the best example. We can pick the Turkish and the Kurds. We can pick Syria. We can pick Azerbaijan. We can pick Pakistan. Saudi's actions in Yemen. I mean literally the list of "bad things that happen in the world that nobody cares about because no Jews" is endless. Most of the world is in a terrible state. You're nitpicking me on veto rights but you're not addressing my point.
Israel is singled out. It is the target of endless lies and racism. It is the target of antisemitism. There is no doubt about that and I'm not sure how you can be a "Zionist" and not see that.
This does not mean everything Israel does is right or that there's no criticism to be levelled at it. My argument isn't Israel should get a free pass because look how bad the world is. My argument is Israel is subject to antisemitism and double standards.
And this is before we even start debating the facts of the war and the history of the conflict.
EDIT:
"The Preoccupation of the United Nations with Israel: Evidence and Theory" - https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/105108/1/cesifo_wp50...
"The UN and Israel: A history of discrimination" - https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/...
"The United Nations Human Rights Council and Israel: Sour Old Wine in a New Bottle" - https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/...
Honestly, I haven't read more than a couple sentences of these obsessive rants in 3 comments, just enough to check what you've learned about the UN so far.
This isn't behavior I expect to see on HN, and after reviewing the thread, it looks like its a consistent issue, across multiple threads: you ask questions addressed long ago, claim people aren't answering them, then go rabid with page after page telling us the answer. Thanks for your insightful contributions.
This is what our discussion looks like from my perspective.
> you have to be of a very specific mindset to see message after message about the evil UN and not say, "uh, did we go off the rails somewhere?"
Me: "We can measure "unjustly singled out"" + China and the Uyghurs is one example we can look at.
> The China claims are straight up lies
False. Then you try to weasel your way out of that.
> the implication that other human rights abuses aren't policed is another google-able lie
False. You refuse to engage on any factual basis to support your incorrect statement.
> Please don't troll me.
> I haven't read more than a couple sentences of these obsessive rants
> This isn't behavior I expect to see on HN
> it looks like its a consistent issue, across multiple threads: you ask questions addressed long ago
You did not actually address any question I had for you.
[EDIT: deleted]
Then you went off on me, a Zionist, about how I'm yelling apartheid(?).
Then you went off about how the security council (with China on it??) is the real measure.
Then you went off on I never answered if I thought UN was biased against Israel compared to China (???) We can start again from there if your interest here is curiosity. Is it?
I don't think we're gonna get anywhere here otherwise.
[EDIT: I'll take 50% of the blame for this going sideways.]