search results matching tag: Humanitarian

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (105)     Sift Talk (14)     Blogs (4)     Comments (1000)   

She Uses What Hospitals Waste to Save Lives

The Day Liberty Died

newtboy says...

Israel is not, and never has been our ally.
Our support of their racist, genocidal regime is baffling in the extreme.

Nobody asked why? I think it's likely because they didn't want anyone recording their other war crimes. Blaming someone else with hopes of bringing us into their war on their side was probably a secondary motive.

And two days ago Israel restarted it's illegal expansion by once again breaking international law and the Geneva convention by renewing efforts to forcefully 'evict' the native Bedouin living in Khan al-Ahmar since before Israel existed and leveling the township.
This sparks the beginning of another genocidal round of expansion and military bluster from Israel, another one we will undoubtedly turn a blind eye to, or perhaps we'll blame the displaced natives like we do the Palestinians.
The UN has previously warned that international humanitarian law requires an occupying power to protect the population of the territory that it occupies, ensure its welfare and wellbeing, as well as the respect for its human rights. Any destruction of property by the occupying power is prohibited, except when rendered absolutely necessary by military operations, the UN says. The extensive demolition of property is a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention and may amount to a war crime, it adds.


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-45420915

Melania At Child Prisons Wears"I Don't Really Care, Do You?"

newtboy says...

No Bob, it has not.

A few cases a year of forcibly separating children from their family for cause or temporarily holding unaccompanied minors is in no way the same as jailing every refugee, legal or not, and separating thousands of children a month.

And real Republicans (not you) have finally found the Rubicon they won't cross, and are starting to become Democrats in large numbers with some long respected Republicans leading them in an effort to slow the Trumpian destruction they went along with for too long....i just hope enough of them to counteract the know nothing tribalistic morons that are replacing intelligent people in your party.

You are such a careless and sad liar...if you're going to lie, come up with better, harder to disprove lies, or face a lambasting for your stupidity and gullibility in believing Russian propaganda once again (after falling into that pit so many times I can't count) without ever making the tiniest bit of effort to see if what you wish is true and have been told by oan Jones RT or faux is true actually is true (hint, it never is).


You just love spreading obvious, easily debunked, idiotic lies....
But Jesus, Bob, even for you, this is pathetic, and that's saying a lot.

Fuck any person going on a humanitarian trip to see terrified displaced separated refugee children while wearing a message saying "I don't care". They are either too heartless or brainless to deserve a whit of respect, there's no middle ground.
Fuck anyone willing to tear apart thousands of families as a form of political blackmail , fuck them in the ass with a billy club if they have no plan on how to reverse their family separations when their bullying tactic fails.
Fuck anyone standing with and defending those indefensible actions of human garbage.

bobknight33 said:

No F the left.

This has been going on for decades. Now under Trump only the Left is piling on..

The Truth About Jerusalem

bcglorf says...

I think I see things more jadedly than you do.

Here's what I see of the situation. On a nation state level, nobody cares about the Palestinians. The Palestinians only influence on the chess board is their suffering. All of their 'allies' like Syria, Egypt and Iran don't care about the Palestinians for anything more than making sure that they suffer, the greater and the more public that suffering the better propaganda it makes. Israel and it's allies only care about the Palestinians in so far as that same suffering makes them look bad and sways public opinion as well. The threat from the Palestinians is a police and humanitarian matter, not a military one.

So everybody with boots on the ground doesn't care about the Palestinians. The Israeli side will take what they want as long as public opinion isn't too onerous on it. The Arab nations will actively arm, encite and push the Palestinians from peace to violence at ever turn because it ensures they serve their 'purpose' of public suffering better.

I count exactly zero hope for a two state solution reached between Palestinian and Israeli's as equals. A future of the region where the Palestinian people are afforded a better future either in a province of Israel, or their own state created under terms dictated to it by Israel I see as at least an existent possibility. I honestly believe seeking something more is simply not a possibility because NOBODY wants it. The Israeli's don't, the Palestinians allies don't, even the Palestinians themselves don't.

You seem to think maybe the parties can be made to change their minds on that, but it runs contrary to their self interests.

Israel gains nothing by backing down and negotiating as equals for a two state solution.

Palestine's 'allies' actually lose out greatly in any resolution to the status quo because it currently ties down Israel and makes for great propaganda. They'd lose that and gain nothing in return but less suffering for the Palestinians whom they don't care about.

Palestinians themselves might be persuaded to change their minds, but the only ones swaying their public opinion are their 'allies' with a vested interested in making sure they continue to fight forever for all of Palestine and not settle for two states. Additionally, for all intents and purposes their opinions don't matter anyways because they lack the power to make a meaningful difference.

None of the above is my opinion on how I would like things to be, nor how I think they should be, but rather how I see it actually looking. Nation state actions can usually be stripped down to narrow self interest and naught else. The exceptions are failures of the state representation, like say a dictator choosing their personal interest over a national one, or a buffoon blundering off into idiotic random actions...

newtboy said:

Imo, the peace process isn't dead, but it's deathly ill because Israel keeps expanding.

Want and can accept are two different things.

We give them most of that military might, and back it with ours. Without that interference, they might be more fair and equitable, with it they clearly won't, they'll continue to bully their weaker, poorer, displaced neighbors.

Popular opinion in Israel seems to be the Palestinians should be eradicated, so fair, equitable, compassionate treatment is incredibly unlikely and not realistic without being forced into it.

Drone Footage Of Syrian Base After Recent Tomahawk Strike

newtboy says...

Well, bombing planes is not humanitarian, it's retaliatory. Humanitarian would be offering the citizens medical help, food, and protection, things we aren't doing in Syria. (Before you say this is protection, note the airport was operating the day after the missiles hit them).

It's only tit for tat if Assad actually gassed his people, which is still in question. Remember, there's a propaganda war happening there too, where both sides are liars and the 'truth' is hidden in a field of lies. Initial appearances are more often than not just propaganda.

It does send a message, that Trump is reactionary and inpatient and won't wait around for proof before acting unilaterally....and unconstitutionally. Attacking another sovereign nation clearly, unequivocally REQUIRES congressional approval by law, he didn't even seek it, much less get it. Don't ignore that, address it please.

EDIT: Another good question to ask, did this cost as much or more for us to bomb as it destroyed? Tomahawks are expensive, about $1.4 million each + the cost to deploy them (at least another $100 million +-), and 30 year old planes, a cafeteria, and above ground gas tanks, not so much....the Russians claim only $9 million in damage with fresh video evidence that they probably aren't far off with that estimate. That's a terrible return on investment coming from the deal maker in chief.

bobknight33 said:

First of all I do not think America should have any involvement there except for humanitarian reasons.

This counter strike a tit for tat jab at Assad in Syria.

More importantly it sends a message to the world that there is a new sheriff in town. One that may not capitulate and falter if action is needed.

On the down side is that America still does not know how Trump will react to a real crisis.

This Assad strike was a measured response. I just hope all future responses will be as such.

Drone Footage Of Syrian Base After Recent Tomahawk Strike

bobknight33 says...

First of all I do not think America should have any involvement there except for humanitarian reasons.

This counter strike a tit for tat jab at Assad in Syria.

More importantly it sends a message to the world that there is a new sheriff in town. One that may not capitulate and falter if action is needed.

On the down side is that America still does not know how Trump will react to a real crisis.

This Assad strike was a measured response. I just hope all future responses will be as such.

Waiting for the wave !!! Pool in Chengdu (China)

Florence and the Machine surprise dying teen in hospice.

Florence and the Machine surprise dying teen in hospice.

Donald Trump will never be President of the United States

bobknight33 says...

Ukraine was a NATO arrangement. That is a tough one. Probably not directly attack but use UN sanctions.

Syria line in the sand issue... If Trump was president at the time I think he would have acted in some sort.

Today Syria with Russia on its side. Hornets nest. But It wold be Boss to fly daily humanitarian flights and tell Syria / Russia not F with these flights or else ...

newtboy said:

I actually agree with these two, and I was quite disappointed about both, but do you honestly believe Trump will stand up to Putin in similar circumstances?

USA and russian relations at a "most dangerous moment"

vil says...

Pretty much interview scripted by Putin personally.

Why the drama about US - russian relations if the russians supposedly are not dangerous and Putin is not evil.

Building a case to sell Poland and the Baltic countries to Putin. Worked like a charm with Hitler and Czechoslovakia before WWII. Poland these days does not even have a border with Russia proper, only with what used to be Koenigsberg. Poland is part of NATO and if Abby and her friend the professor want to give that up then it is them who are pushing us all closer to a war (cold or not).

Ukraine has already exploded. Putin has already taken 1/3 of the country breaking bilateral treaties. Cant get much worse, hard to imagine how the US can get involved, Trump notwithstanding.

Syria - its basically over, except for the humanitarian and human rights catastrophe. Putins ally won - a slightly pyrrhic victory perhaps, but for the meantime Assad stays. Did they level cities or liberate them? Hard to tell the difference. Probably both. That said US involvement in the middle east is a grave shitstorm.

This awesome "analysis" somehow misses the biggest current problem of NATO - Turkey - possibly because Putin does not have a good handle on Turkey yet so its off-limits. Also Pakistan/India and North Korea does not get a mention for the same reason - no chance to push Putins agenda.

NATO might have reassured Gorby it had no intention to spread. It is important to understand that Warsaw pact countries generally accepted Russians as saviours from German occupation, by the 1970s this had changed firmly to perceiving Russians as occupants, political persecutors and economic idiots.

After the economic collapse of the USSR (supposedly somehow caused by Ronald Reagan :-) all these countries needed reassurance that the Russians were not coming back. The only possible reassurance was joining NATO. If that meant breaking a promise made to an ex-representative of a no longer existing country, that is fine by me. If NATO had promised not to spread to Mother Theresa I would be more concerned.

The problem with the Ukraine is that we (EU) made an offer that put them in danger (from Putin) and we could not back that up with real economic or military assistance. Dumb move. But also Ukrainian politics is an incredible mess and simply too many ethnic russians live there giving Putin a strong nationalist base.

bill burr reviews the movie-the orphan

coolhund says...

Some movies just need you to not be 100% logical. Actually a lot.
Ive seen it and it was actually pretty good. Reminded me of similar movies from the 80s and they did well implementing that into a modern movie.

But I guess if you live in a world where so called peace loving people (actually nobel peace prize winners) start wars, break international laws, support terrorists, blame other parties that werent even involved until the end for the whole war and who are just trying to defend a sovereign country, and then bring those people, they brought war to, into their own countries out of "humanitarianism", then a movie like this just cant make sense at all.

JustSaying said:

I heard what the twist of the movie was and refused to watch it because of its stupidity.
Same happened with 'Lucy' where the premise was too stupid to endure the film.

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

Gatekeeper

siftbot says...

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, October 3rd, 2016 1:37pm PDT - promote requested by eric3579.

Adding video to channels (Humanitarian) - requested by eric3579.

Gatekeeper



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon