They probably want the ceasefire to last until the WHO says the pandemic is over. Which is a shit idea that leaves our military handcuffed until China says so. Fuck that.
It's fair to request a cease fire in major conflicts though it's often very difficult if that puts one side out.
A lot of what the UN does is claim real issues then attach all their wish lists to it and bizarre ideology exactly as we saw with Pelosi and her disgusting display with the stimulus bill.
We have to be somewhat careful because there's always a real cause somewhere, a hard problem but these people aren't fit to deal with it. It's always the ulterior motive that comes first with real problems they don't really care about being an excuse or rather leverage.
The name of the political game is that you get further if you threaten to refuse to cooperate unless you get what you want. Often this is painted as the reverse. Someone fails to cooperate by issuing absurd ultimatums, demands, conditions, etc. Then when someone says screw that they're painted as the villain.
Politicians but democrats especially operate by attaching their own price tag to everything and then blaming their opposition when they say I'm not paying that.
I think the US military being handcuffed is unlikely though I would be very careful because that threat is coming from within. The US can just tell the UN to STFU but democrats are trying to push that bill Trump just vetoed in an attempt to tie his hands.
The threat is real and there are many other similar threats but the avenues of attack vary. The UN is one but it doesn't have the means to enforce everything it might impose on the USA. The USA has a bigger stick. So you also need to watch out for infiltration and the threat from within.
The larger danger here is the one the USA has correctly identified. Attempting to give the WHO undue power which many USA tech giants have already taken it upon themselves to do treating the WHO as having sole authority on what people are allowed to say putting it in the position to regulate content on the internet globally in the same way that the CCP does domestically.
We can say the WHO has in effect infiltrated USA companies or companies that either operate in the USA or that can impose limitations on the freedoms of free citizens on the USA when they go online or even in state given governors are now also becoming subordinate to the WHO.
If that resolution passes the dems will be beating everyone else over the head with it as though it's a higher authority whose commandments everyone must fall in line with and follow. Globalists see international organisations as a higher authority over national organisations rather than an intermediate between independent nations.
Globalists will bow down to anything with World, Global, International, etc in the name and they are an entry point into the inner workings of the nation.
They probably want the ceasefire to last until the WHO says the pandemic is over. Which is a shit idea that leaves our military handcuffed until China says so. Fuck that.
It's fair to request a cease fire in major conflicts though it's often very difficult if that puts one side out.
A lot of what the UN does is claim real issues then attach all their wish lists to it and bizarre ideology exactly as we saw with Pelosi and her disgusting display with the stimulus bill.
We have to be somewhat careful because there's always a real cause somewhere, a hard problem but these people aren't fit to deal with it. It's always the ulterior motive that comes first with real problems they don't really care about being an excuse or rather leverage.
The name of the political game is that you get further if you threaten to refuse to cooperate unless you get what you want. Often this is painted as the reverse. Someone fails to cooperate by issuing absurd ultimatums, demands, conditions, etc. Then when someone says screw that they're painted as the villain.
Politicians but democrats especially operate by attaching their own price tag to everything and then blaming their opposition when they say I'm not paying that.
I think the US military being handcuffed is unlikely though I would be very careful because that threat is coming from within. The US can just tell the UN to STFU but democrats are trying to push that bill Trump just vetoed in an attempt to tie his hands.
The threat is real and there are many other similar threats but the avenues of attack vary. The UN is one but it doesn't have the means to enforce everything it might impose on the USA. The USA has a bigger stick. So you also need to watch out for infiltration and the threat from within.
The larger danger here is the one the USA has correctly identified. Attempting to give the WHO undue power which many USA tech giants have already taken it upon themselves to do treating the WHO as having sole authority on what people are allowed to say putting it in the position to regulate content on the internet globally in the same way that the CCP does domestically.
We can say the WHO has in effect infiltrated USA companies or companies that either operate in the USA or that can impose limitations on the freedoms of free citizens on the USA when they go online or even in state given governors are now also becoming subordinate to the WHO.
If that resolution passes the dems will be beating everyone else over the head with it as though it's a higher authority whose commandments everyone must fall in line with and follow. Globalists see international organisations as a higher authority over national organisations rather than an intermediate between independent nations.
Globalists will bow down to anything with World, Global, International, etc in the name and they are an entry point into the inner workings of the nation.
Good analysis
Could TLDR it as the headline should be USA exerts its independence in UNSC ruling.
The connotations of that and independence should raise some eye brows.