And all this slaughter by peace loving Buddhist...makes you laugh in a sick sort of way!

I don't think you can blame Buddhism. I had a trip to Burma booked a few years ago, but had to cancel because the government was killing Buddhist monks. And, we have to remember that the Rohingya are Muslim, and wherever Muslims are in the minority, they are a problem. And, also let's not forget, if the Rohingya were in the majority in Burma, they would be persecuting Buddhists.

We need to keep our noses out of non-Western countries, and ignore anything that the United Nations wants. We have had enough savages foisted on us because we just had to stick our nose into dysfunctional countries and do what the United Nations wanted us to do. West is best, and the rest need to copy us if they want decent lives.

ttbn,
hear, hear !

The security councils decisions must be unanimous to be able to be applied and lawful.

And as long as rogue states with even worse human rights violation record retain a veto. Nothing much can or will change. Particularly when Trump who could unilaterally force the issue? Is frozen with fear and irresolute political populism. Nothing much will change.

Particularly when some of these alleged victims have reportedly precipitated this event with terrorist activities against the host nation. And then when it all goes pear-shaped expect others to come in and haul their irons out of the fire

. All these folk can do is accept the peace and resettlement offer on the table. End of story!

There are over fifty million displaced refugees in refugee camps around the world, some faring far worse and for literal generations, with worse human rights violations a part of their history.

Why should these former squatters and uninvited guests expect some kind of superior outcome?

There is a solution but one which is currently prevented by big money, big nuclear, the fossil fuel industry and big pharma? I believe, out of pure self-interest and economic survival of the most powerful? In the west and the east!

As long as these folk hold all the aces, they control the outcomes and or the current status quo!

As long a the downtrodden and poor accept that as their unchangeable reality and remain sat on their backsides when they could instead, get organised and out there to vote when they can!?

Even where that means taking Thursday off and queuing all day with a water bottle, in the heat or rain, snow and ice? And in so doing, finally, affect change! Nothing much will change!
Alan B.

The UN have known what is going on in Myanmar for years and did nothing, they will continue to do nothing but rattle of words that no one in power listens too.

The UN needs to be abolished too many self interested countries and people involved for that to happen.

Mr Phillips Sir, it's not down to the UN's general assembly to decide when to intervene, but rather the security council and by a unanimous vote!

And as long as China with a worse human rights record? And Russia with one not much better who are active participants in the genocide that is today's Syria. Continue to exercise a veto to prevent action inside another nation's sovereign borders, nothing can be done by the toothless tiger the security council becomes when these two use their power of veto!

[Sovereign borders not worth much in Tibet or the South China Sea or Taiwan, or Georgia or The Crimea or Ukraine?]

And continue to do so even against the will of the entire United assembly, minus the aforementioned.

What's next? Abandon democracy because a tiny minority of Johnny come lately, don't like it, but would prefer Putin or the Ayatollah? Or worse?
Alan B.

Abandon democracy
Alan b,
Where is there any to abandon ?

Good point individual. Winston Churchhill, probably got it right when he said, Democracy is the worst form of government, but better than all the rest. Yes, there's a lot wrong with our form of government or in the home of modern-day democracy, the USA, where they have the very best democracy money can buy. Whereas here it's by the party, for the party and of the party.

Consequently, we remain the sole "democracy" without an irrevocable bill of rights and are tethered to a preference system that removes your right to elect your preferred candidate and supplants another that is placed there with dirty deals done in the dead of night.

We should have either full proportional voting with primaries to decide who gets nominated so as to eliminate the power brokers, factions and dirty deals done in the dark, behind closed doors.

Time the coalition split into the more democratic liberal and the born to rule conservatives? And put an end to the laughing stock/shambles, our parliament has become.

After we the people decide who all the candidates will be, elect our choice with first past the post with more than 50% or to a runoff between the leading contenders.

For a fixed term that cannot be altered to suit various individuals or parties. Or with proportional representation minus any preferencing, that then may allow some nobody with just 19 votes to win an appointment, when the elected appointee loses their seat for whatever reason.

A bill of irrevocable rights would necessarily include a citizens' initiated referendum. Had we had this right we the people could have stopped a PM from selling the farm/heirloom silverware so he could porkbarrel to another electoral win, As well as creating an entitlement mindset?

Or simply force a royal commission into power pricing or generation methods?

That said, our form of democracy with all its faults, beats those examples in Turkey, Russia and Cambodia, just to mention the most glaring examples of electoral democracy along with freedom of the press! The latter something Putin's puppet in Washington? Clearly hates!?
Alan B.

The United Nations, and security council couldn’t stop the IRA who operated with impunity for decades.
They couldn’t stop the slaughter in Rwanda and the Serbs had shot thousands of Muslims before the United Nations finally
sent a so called peace keeping force in.

The city of Kuwait was raped and plundered for 3 months before a security force could be approved to go in to stop it.

The United Nations is pretty useless if you ask me. And today the United Nations is onesided in who it supports.
They might as well disband it.

It was always going to have Nations who back their own interests.
I never in my whole life thought it was a workable organisation.

Dear Rebecca.

Islam wrote the book on ethnic cleansing, genocide, and lethally enforced assimilation, and that book is called "The Koran." As an instruction manual for justifying religious war, foreign conquest, and the worst aspects of Imperialism, the Koran has much to recommend it. It might surprise you to know that Afghanistan was once primarily Buddhist, and an established civilisation before the Muslims smashed their way in, killed every Buddhist, and turned civilised Afghanistan back to the 6th Century.

They slaughtered their way across India killing hundreds of millions, and you wonder why the Hindus don't like them? They tried to do the same in Burma and Thailand, but fortunately, their Buddhist victims in were able to stay in the majority. If the Muslims had prevailed, you would now be whining about Muslim persecution of Burmese and Thai Buddhists. If it had not been for the modern day Muslim minorities usual troublemaking in those countries only recently, attacking police stations and murdering soldiers, the Burmese and the Thais would probably have left them alone.

But the Muslims just can't help themselves. They have fight for Allah to attain Allah's favour and his promise of paradise, and they can never accept that Islam should be subject to any other culture. Therefore they are a serious danger to any peaceful society they inhabit, including our own.

But in Burma at least, their victims are hitting back and informing the Muslims that they should return to the Caliphate and then they can live in Islamic ignorance and squalor forever. I really don't know what you are whining about? If there were a small minority of Nazis in Israel, and the Israelis victimised them and tried to ethnically cleanse them out of their country, wouldn't you find that understandable? Would you go into bat for the Nazis? If the answer is "no", them why are you crying over what Islam's usual victims are doing to their traditional oppressors?