Skip to comments.Media Reported Trump Adm Opposed U.N. Resolution Against Wartime Rape[What Actually Happened]
Posted on 05/12/2019 9:54:41 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Over the past two days, nearly every major media outlet reported that the Trump administration either objected to or "diluted" a United Nations resolution condemning rape as a weapon of war.
"US threatens to veto UN resolution on rape as weapon of war, officials say," a headline from The Guardian read.
"UN waters down rape resolution to appease US's hardline abortion stance," read a second article in The Guardian.
"United States dilutes UN rape-in-war resolution," read the headline from the BBC.
"Trump administration forces UN to water down resolution opposing rape in war," was the headline from the Independent.
"The U.N. wanted to end sexual violence in war. Then the Trump administration had objections," wrote The Washington Post.
"Bowing to U.S. demands, U.N. waters down resolution on sexual violence in conflict," wrote Reuters.
To read those headlines, one would think the Trump administration was pro-wartime rape, or at the very least, not strongly against it. The headlines obviously worked, because certain "feminist" Democrats immediately jumped on the articles without bothering to read them or even think for a single second about the possibility that there was more to the story. Hillary Clinton called the administration's move "despicable."
"This is despicable. The Trump administration is not only ceding America's role as a leader on the human rights of women, it's actively working against those rights. We all have to work together to right this wrong and undo this damage," she tweeted.
This is despicable. The Trump administration is not only ceding Americas role as a leader on the human rights of women, its actively working against those rights. We all have to work together to right this wrong and undo this damage. https://t.co/L5IWLLy2eB Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) April 24, 2019
In reality, the Trump administration is not for wartime rape.
The New York Post's Sohrab Ahmari published an article Wednesday evening discrediting all the previous headlines on the subject, writing: "Team Trump didn't try to stop UN from cracking down on wartime rapists."
As Ahmari wrote, the U.N. resolution was introduced by German Diplomats without consulting American diplomats first, even though the U.S. has been working on this issue for decades. The draft contained provisions that the U.S. and other member states objected to, including a provision that would go against U.S. law by including language that would promote abortion around the world.
A senior diplomat told Ahmari that European Union countries were using the issue of rape as a weapon of war to "normalize abortion rights as the standard of care."
"Resolutions at the Security Council gain the force of law. Thus, permitting the Germans to pass their original draft resolution at the council would have codified into international law opinions about abortion, gender and sexuality that run contrary to the sense of right and wrong shared by people across Africa, Asia and Latin America. Not to mention many Americans," Ahmari wrote.
Also, the German resolution proposed creating a new, expensive U.N. "mechanism" to handle the issue, even though theres already such a mechanism in place.
Ahmari also reported that Russia and China objected to the resolution (Russia, for abortion reasons; China, for reasons related to "non-agreed" language) and planned to veto the entire resolution.
"But thanks to US pressure, the Germans dropped the objectionable language, and in the end, the resolution passed, with only the Russians and Chinese abstaining. Put another way: The Trump administratio's diplomacy helped save a resolution with strong protections for women in wartime that would have otherwise been scuttled altogether," Ahmari wrote.
All of those headlines above should have said the TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SAVED a U.N. resolution on wartime rape, BUT they REPORTRD reported almost the EXACT OPPOSITE.
The MSM doing the bidding of their master- the father of lies-
If anyone has evidence of a US military individual committing rape in a war-zone....report it. We have the system already developed to review the action, set-up a court, and try the guy. We don’t need to invent something out of thin air and give procedural powers over US citizens. These pro-UN dimwits want to pretend there isn’t any legal means within any NATO participant, and they would fill this gap.
Where is rape a weapon of war, and among whom?
Not by people who care about UN resolutions. And how do you stop it? By defeating them in war. If you dare.
Ask the Germans about the Russians and wartime rape.
During WWII there were several enlisted men in the Red Ball Express who would stop their trucks and rape French women. Eisenhower had them all hanged.
The UN wanted to end sexual violence in war
Well, hell. Why then didnt the UN just want to pass a resolution to end WAR?!
The New York Post's Sohrab Ahmari published an article Wednesday evening discrediting all the previous headlines on the subject, writing: "Team Trump didn't try to stop UN from cracking down on wartime rapists." ...was introduced by German Diplomats without consulting American diplomats first, even though the U.S. has been working on this issue for decades. The draft contained... language that would promote abortion around the world... to "normalize abortion rights as the standard of care."
I believe it is the blue helmets who are stationed in a country that are committing these rapes.
oooh. THat is so bad for their self-esteem.
War time rape is a natural Darwinian action that perpetuates the strong and eliminates the weak.
Specieation is all about survival of the fittest.
Wartime rape is about the transfer of genes
Rape as a weapon of war is, in the current era, mainly practiced by Muslim jihadis. I don’t think they are going to respond to a UN warrant, and the only way to stop them is to wipe them out. Boko Haram, Al Shabbab, Al Qaeda, ISIS, you don’t send their lawyers a letter.
You don’t litigate war. War is the circumstance you find yourself in when civil and criminal law can no longer resolve a conflict.
Actually, I had forgotten, you are right. UN troops are famous for rape. Its practically their calling card.
As it happens, it appears the obama crime gang was in favor of wartime child rape, particularly in Afghanistan, where it prohibited US troops from preventing it, even prosecuting one who gave such a rapist his ticket to 72 virgins.
That’ll stop rape.
And the UN Peacekeepers, military members of various African nations, the Baltics, the Middle East...hell, I’m not saying that it never happened at the hands of a member of the US military, where that individual would spend quite a long, long, long time in a cage, but, with these other military’s and countries, it’s almost part of the SOPs.
A difficult sell...but I can see it.
Or they are just barbaric and want to cause violence to women and children
I highly doubt that a rapist (outside of war) is trying to just pass his genes along. Hes committing an act of violence just as is done when at war.
A rapist is never consciously trying to pass on genes.
A rapist is driven by lust. Lust is the instinctive need to procreate.
In civilized societies, we disdain uncontrolled lust and try to contain rape, even in war time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.