But wait, there’s more:
Instead of withholding food aid from Russia until it disarmed – and it would have worked because the situation was dire – these absolute geniuses disarmed smaller countries next to Russia. This went on for a quarter of a century with Biden, Clinton and Obama being the most complicit.
So when Trump said that this war wouldn’t have happened without Biden, he’s quite literally right. Trump wasn’t in any public office until 2016, two years after the Russian invasion began.
Does France view Israel as a strategic threat to French strategic interests to dominate all states in the Middle East, and Israel in particular based upon UN Resolution 242?
The 1956 Suez Crisis, where Israel’s military success caught Paris and London off guard, marked a significant shift in power dynamics. The crisis demonstrated that colonial powers could no longer unilaterally dictate outcomes in the region, leading to a reassessment of their strategies. This event forced both Paris and London to reassess their strategies and acknowledge the rising influence of local and regional actors.
Israel’s victory in 1967 further solidified its position in the region, complicating French and British ambitions. The changing geopolitical landscape necessitated a more nuanced approach from these countries, particularly as emerging Arab nationalism began to reshape alliances. The complexities of French interests and the historical legacies that influence current policies. The interplay between colonial legacies, strategic interests, and regional power dynamics is indeed critical for a comprehensive understanding of France’s role in the Middle East.
The interplay between colonial legacies, strategic interests, and regional power dynamics remains critical for understanding France’s current policies in the Middle East. France’s historical ties, economic interests, and political strategies continue to be shaped by these complex factors.
France’s colonial history and ambitions in the Middle East, particularly post-World War I, shaped its initial support for Israel. However, as regional dynamics evolved, especially with the rise of Arab nationalism and the influence of local actors, France’s policies had to adapt. UN Resolution 242’s calls for withdrawal from territories “occupied in the 1967 war” conveniently ignores the UN condemnation of Jordan in 1950 for its illegal annexation of Samaria which Jordan re-named “West Bank”. Withdrawal from territories occupied in the 1967 war, simply political rhetoric propaganda and nothing more. Simply not the place of either France, Britain or any UN Security Council Country to unilaterally determine that the land of Samaria constitutes as “occupied territories”!
France’s support for this UN SCR promotes the propaganda rhetoric that demands a return to the pre-war status quo. Again simply not the place of any country sitting in the UN Security Council to behave as if Israel existed as a Mandate Protectorate of the UN! Regarding UN Resolution 242, it calls for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the 1967 war and emphasizes the need for a just and lasting peace – absolute Great Power rubbish. The UNSC Resolution treats Israel as a defeated inferior race which must submit to the Will of the Great Powers who decide the international borders of the Jewish State!
The notion: [The designation of territories as “occupied” continues to spark debate, particularly regarding the historical context of Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank.], utter and absolute rubbish. Jordan attacked Israel in the June 1967 War. Jordan illegally annexed Samaria following the 1948 War. These simple facts not subject to debate!
The UN SCR 242 abomination of UN Great Power imperialism compares to the Oct 7th Hamas invasion of Israel in 2023 and the condemnations by the ICC in support of S. Africa’s slander of Genocide. A slander that compares to: the Jews poisoned the wells, or the Jews murdered Xtian babies to make matza bread which lead to bloody pogroms! European demands for Israel not to capture Rafah and the Philadelphia Corridor based upon pie in the sky speculation that Israel would slaughter 10s of thousands of Gaza civilians! Complete and utter rubbish political trash which caused student riots in major Universities across Europe and the United States.
UN Resolution 242 as a product of “Great Power imperialism” highlights a common viewpoint that sees the resolution as undermining Israel’s legitimacy and sovereignty. The framing of territories as “occupied” can be interpreted as a politicization of historical realities, particularly regarding Jordan’s actions before 1967. Parallels between historical injustices and current events, like the actions of Hamas and international responses, reflects a broader sentiment of frustration with perceived double standards in international law and diplomacy. This perspective argues that the historical mistreatment of Jews has often been ignored or minimized in contemporary discourse.
Goyim lynch mobs have a long bloody history guilty of countless war-crimes committed against the Jewish people. Hundreds of years after Spain expelled all Jews and thereafter instituted the barbaric Inquisition followed by belated apologies by current Spanish governments today does not amount to squat! Fact: On Oct 7th 2023 Hamas invaded and murdered over 1200 Israelis and stole some 250 hostages, many of whom have since died under Hamas cruel oppression. Fact: the Red Cross has never visited any of these stolen Israeli hostages. Fact: International demands for an immediate Cease Fire totally ignore the plight of the remaining stolen Israeli hostages cruelly tortured by Hamas today!
The critique of UN Resolution 242 as a manifestation of “Great Power imperialism” stems from the perception that the resolution undermines Israel’s legitimacy and sovereignty. This viewpoint emphasizes the politicization of historical realities, particularly regarding Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank prior to 1967. The characterization of territories as “occupied” is seen as an attempt to manipulate the historical narrative.
The parallels drawn between historical injustices and current events, such as the actions of Hamas and international responses, reflect a broader sentiment of frustration with perceived double standards in international law and diplomacy. This perspective contends that the historical mistreatment of Jewish people has often been disregarded or trivialized in contemporary discourse. Specific incidents, such as the Hamas invasion on Oct 7th, 2023, resulting in the murder of over 1200 Israelis and the theft of 250 hostages, are pointed out to emphasize the ongoing challenges faced by Jewish communities. The Red Cross’s failure to visit these stolen Israeli hostages and international demands for an immediate cease-fire without addressing the plight of the remaining hostages serve to illustrate the perceived disregard for Jewish suffering.
LikeLike
“disarmed smaller countries next to Russia”
Completely insane…. so many times after some horrible ignominious russian failure the west picks it up, dusts it off and sends it on its way hoping for a bit of recognition or gratitude and all it ever gets is a new russian government spitting venom in return…
Some countries are grateful for help… russia is not one of them.
Russia would have starved rather than disarm. See the behavior of their North Korean allies.
LikeLike
Only works in places where public opinion matters?
LikeLike
A conservative literary critic and college professor
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment