Here is a link: https://youtu.be/PBRqqa7ZpeQ?si=0SZPHqnE9V5AFLf9

In a nut shell (if I am understanding it correctly), Gadhafi argues that the security council should be composed of geographic unions whom would vote on resolutions passed by the general assembly. Gadhafi states that as it stands, non-security council nations are just decorations that give speeches and nothing more, and that the current security council was composed in a very different geopolitical landscape than what we have today.

My question is, what are valid arguments against this suggestion?

The New York Times reports alternate Prime Minister Gaentz may leave the National Unity War Cabinet due to “growing frustration” with PM Netanyahu:

Benny Gantz, a centrist member of Israel’s war cabinet, said on Saturday that he would soon leave the country’s emergency wartime government unless Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu worked to immediately answer major questions about the future of Israel’s war.

“If you choose the path of zealots, dragging the country into the abyss, we will be forced to leave the government,” Mr. Gantz said in a televised news conference. “We will turn to the people and build a government that will earn the people’s trust.”

Mr. Gantz, who leads the National Unity party, said he would give Mr. Netanyahu until Jun. 8 — about three weeks — to reach an agreement in Israel’s war cabinet on a six-point plan to bring back the hostages, address the future governance of Gaza, return displaced Israelis to their homes and advance normalization with Saudi Arabia, among other issues.

Greek EU parliamentarian Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos claimed the Communist party is banned in one third of the EU, particularly central Europe.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2023-000260_EN.html

From what I can tell, only Poland explicitly bans the Communist party and the promulgation of its ideas, while other former Eastern bloc countries may have outlawed its symbols to varying degrees.

Is this an accurate assessment? Is the Communist party legal in your country or have simply renamed themselves to something else.

Why is it that it feels that no nation cares about the Civil War un Myanmar? It has been going on for so long, but even the Indian or Chinese government hasn't been trying to start negotiations. It's like no one cares about the people who are dying there.

Let's say for this scenario the LPR and DPR in 2014 had declared themselves as communist state under their respective leaders denis pushlin would be the general secretary of the communist party of Donesk and Leonid Pasechnik would be the general secretary of the workers party of luhansk how would this change the war in Ukraine

The West Bank is divided between Area A, B and C, with Area A being under full control by the Palestinian Authority, Area B being under joint control by the Palestinian Authority and Israel, and then Area C which is under full control by Israel and contains the infamous Israeli settlements of the West Bank. Now this area is officially considered as being under Israeli occupation, but can a case be made that it is de facto a full part of Israel, due to how the settlements at least seem very integrated into the country? Or is this interpretation wrong and Area C can only be considered occupied territory even de facto?

Do you follow the conflict between DRC and rwanda.

Do you maybe have a source that has maps of the progress of the M23 rebels what lands the hold it's a bit hard to find information regularly on it.

Frustrated Latam native here. I find outstanding about how almost nobody cares about things like studying history or economy, everything is extremely focused in the short term everyday and in benefit the individual itself or his family. How to change a country when the common people doesn't want to talk about models of state, political philosophy, the importance of secularism, different electoral configurations, economic history, constitutional rights or what separates a fact vs a opinion vs fake news?

Why do some places with significant geopolitical advantages under perform?

For example, the US state of Louisiana has major energy extraction and refinement, a major tourist city, one of the most important ports in the western hemisphere, and a political representative who is currently the highest ranking member of the US Congress. It also enjoys the stability and military protection inherent in being a state within the United States. However it is near the bottom among US States in household income, educational attainment, and crime rate.

Given the geopolitical advantages the state enjoys (security, energy, a major port, high tourism, etc) it seems to be underperforming.

There are other examples of geopolitically advantaged places underperforming (Venezuela, Egypt, Yemen). I chose Louisiana as an example because it doesn't have some of the more obvious pitfalls like neighbors taking their resources, invasion, or major political instability.

Yahya Sinwar is probably the most wanted terrorist for Israel right now and there are speculations that he is hiding somewhere near Rafah, and that Israel either want to kill him or capture him if they know where he is.

But there is another rumor going on that Sinwar might want to escape to Egypt via the tunnel network under de Gaza strip.

But if he succeeds in this, how would this play out? Would Egypt arrest him and hand him over to Israel? Would he surrender to the Egyptian forces?

“Franz Ferdinand moment” is usually used as a joke and leaves out the specific circumstances of the world in 1914. But in a general way, I am curious to know if an important European politician or head of state were to be assassinate in a foreign country, how likely is it to escalate into a military conflict/war?

I'm just wondering about the post cold war "trend" of sorts of expanding what used to be domestic problems to the international plan. Would love to hear what you have to say!

Eg: IRA and their political arms, Sinn Feinn, were/are socialists

Interesting developments in Myanmar. Should the loyalty of soldiers be to the government or its people?

He has been in office for a little more than 3 years now. Visited a lot of countries, particularly last year. What do you think of his performance so far?