Russia

[SmallTown]

Had we just blown them up years ago instead of getting in a weapons race pissing contest with Moscow, maybe they would not be here to veto.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4971-2003Mar10.html

 

[vraiblonde]

Curious what happens when a country vetos? Bush called for a UN vote, which tells me he's confident what the vote will be. So if the majority of UN members vote to go after Iraq, and France or Russia veots, what does that mean?

 

[Ken King]

It means that Russia and Canada will both get a gold medal.

 

[vraiblonde]

What I meant was, is a veto different than their regular vote? Is it just a "nay" vote or is it something that happens after the regular votes are in?

 

[Heretic]

The veto is enacted after something passes. So it could pass with only France and Russia voting no and one of them could veto it after it passes.

 

[vraiblonde]

So what happens if they veto it after it passes? Give me an education - I have no idea how this stuff works. I figured it was like the US, where they take a vote and either a simple majority or 2/3 or something like that meant it was over.

 

[Makavide]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/842500.asp?vts=031020031015

Within the council, if a majority of the 15 members vote “no,” Russia’s “no” would not be a veto. If a majority vote “yes,” Russia or another of the five permanent council members has the power to veto the decision.

The United States needs nine yes votes in the 15-member council to pass a resolution while avoiding a veto from Russia, France and China.

Hope this helps answer your question.

Mak

 

[vraiblonde]

Yep, I think that answers my question. But brings up another one: so, like, every country can vote yes, but one country has the power to scotch the whole thing? So basically one country can make a decision for the whole group? Even if the majority of them are for it?

That seems nutty to me.

 

[SmallTown]

Not make the decion, but cancel a decision.

Why is it nutty? The president and congress can fight over vetos as well.

 

[Makavide]

The way I am interpreting it (which could be wrong) is that if 8 members vote no, then there is no need for a veto.

If 8 members vote yes, but either Russia, France, China, U.S or Britian (the permament members of the security council) veto the decision then it is scratched.

However if more then 9 members vote yes, then the veto is scratched.

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by SmallTown
Why is it nutty? The president and congress can fight over vetos as well.

Yeah, but that's in our own country, not a world arena. Plus that, the President was elected as leader of the US - is France or Russia the leader of the UN?

 

[Makavide]

Sorry, I was wrong earlier.

Rules of the 15-member Security Council require nine votes to adopt a resolution. If one of the five permanent members — the United States, Britain, France, Russia, or China — votes ''no'' on a resolution, even one supported by the other 14 nations, that single vote kills the proposal

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by Makavide
Sorry, I was wrong earlier.

Bush better break out the checkbook again...

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by SmallTown
Bush better break out the checkbook again...

Bullsh*t. I vote "go it alone" and to hell with the UN.

Now another question:

The inspectors keep turning up evidence of nuclear and chemical weapons, which is supposed to show that inspections are working. However, the resolution said he couldn't have those things in the first place. So if what they mean by "working" is that they're proving Saddam broke the law, then okay. But if they're using that to try and make the case that he's disarming, sorry - back to Go.

What exactly do they mean when they say "let the inspections work"?

 

[vraiblonde]

Another thing - France, Germany and Russia. There's a trio for you. :stooges: China might make me a little more apprehensive, but these three are nothing - how'd they get a permanent seat, anyway?

 

[bknarw]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
What exactly do they mean when they say "let the inspections work"?

Let's wait until they bomb us, then scream...."Damn Republicans! All they care about is getting rich while Bin Laden and Hussein bomb our cities!"

 

[SmallTown]

Originally posted by bknarw
Let's wait until they bomb us, then scream...."Damn Republicans! All they care about is getting rich while Bin Laden and Hussein bomb our cities!"

and what were you saying about spinning an issue

 

[bknarw]

Originally posted by SmallTown
and what were you saying about spinning an issue

Well....let's see. Inspections haven't worked for 12 years now...so let's wait and LET THEM WORK?

 

[Penn]

Originally posted by bknarw
Well....let's see. Inspections haven't worked for 12 years now...so let's wait and LET THEM WORK?

Bk, he's playing both angles now. He can attempt to rationalize either way. I suspect he has a cousin by the name of Erin Berry, either that, or she's his MPD.

 

[demsformd]

I think that the veto stipulation of the UN regulations is incredibly fair. Why should a country like Guniea have an equal vote to the United States or the UK or any other permanent member? The U.S., the UK, Russia, France, and China make the UN. Without these nations, the UN would just be another League of Nations that failed so miserably.