P.S. Nepaaiskinai , o kodel JAV, kartu su kitomis salimis, vetavo rusu rezoliucija? Kas joje negerai? "Salas" <salas@inbox.lt> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:pb3vh6$gsp$1@trimpas.omnitel.net... > Rusu rezoliucija skambetu labai graziai, jei nepazinotum rusu, ir > nezinotum kas is to isplaukia: > > Rusija siulo, kad visa tyrima kontraliuotu JT. Rusija turi Veto teise > JT. Rusija jau blokavo >10 rezoliuciju susijusiu su sirija. > Vos pabandzius JT suburti komisija cheminems atakoms tirti, ji vel > vetuotu komisijos sudeti, del neva jai neitikusiu nariu. Temptu guma, > kad Asadas spetu susitvarkyti ikalcius, ir net jei pavyktu suburti > komisija ir ji pateiktu kokias nors nedaudingas Rusijai isvadas, ji jas > vel paprasciausiai vetuotu, ir is viso to gautusi snipsta. Todel kitos > salys, zvelgdomos i praeityje ivykdytus Rusijos veiksmus, atmete ju > rezoliucija. > Taip kad esme tame straipsnyje pateikta tiksliai, nors is rezoliuciju > teksto to ir nesimato. > > > > > On 2018-04-16 14:46, Audrys wrote: >> o dabar pademonstruok is kur paimti tie pezalai apie rusijos nenora >> paskelbt? Tavo tekstas yra is independent straipsnio, kuris nepateikia >> jokiu nuorodu i tekstus. >> >> taciau jt tekste nieko panasaus nera >> >> "The Council then proceeded to vote on a competing draft submitted by >> the Russian Federation, also rejecting it, by a recorded vote of 6 in >> favour (Bolivia, China, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Russian >> Federation) to 7 against (France, Netherlands, Peru, Poland, Sweden, >> United Kingdom, United States), with 2 abstentions (Côte d’Ivoire, Kuwait). >> >> By the terms of that text, the Council would have established a United >> Nations independent mechanism of investigation, also for an initial >> period of one year, and urged it to fully ensure a truly impartial, >> independent, professional and credible way to conduct its >> investigation. It would have further directed the mechanism to make >> full use of all credible, verified and corroborated evidence collected >> by the OPCW fact-finding mission, while also directing it to collect and >> examine additional information and sources not obtained or prepared by >> the mission, including all information provided by the Government of >> Syria and others on the activities of non-State actors." >> >> >> "By the terms of a draft resolution submitted by the United States — >> which was not adopted, following a vote of 12 in favour to 2 against >> (Bolivia, Russian Federation) with 1 abstention (China), owing to a veto >> by the Russian Federation — the Council would have established the >> United Nations independent mechanism for an initial period of one year. >> It would have requested the Secretary-General to make recommendations >> about the mechanism including its terms of reference, based on the >> principles of impartiality, independence and professionalism, to >> identify those responsible for the use of chemical weapons in Syria. >> >> Condemning the use of such weapons in the strongest terms, the Council >> would also have expressed full support for the Organisation for the >> Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) fact-finding mission, which was >> already investigating the Douma incident. It would have called on all >> parties in Syria to fully cooperate with both investigations and allow >> them immediate, unfettered, safe and secure access to all relevant >> witnesses, evidence, reporting, materials and sites." >> >> >> https://www.un.org/press/en/2018/sc13288.doc.htm >> >> Taigi kaip ir buvo mineta, amerikosiniam variante yra "Condemning the >> use of such weapons in the strongest terms", kuria siekiama numanomos >> atakos statusa pakeist i fakta nepateikiant jokiu irodymu. >> Taip pat Salui: butent amerikosiniam variante yra " It would have >> requested the Secretary-General to make recommendations about the >> mechanism including its terms of reference", kuris independ'o >> straipsnyje priskiriamas rusams. >> >> >> "Salas" wrote in message news:pb20d3$tk8$1@trimpas.omnitel.net... >> >> Rusija noretu, kad nepriklausomu ekspertu isvados galetu butu >> paskelbtos, tik tada, jei jas patvirtintu Rusija, t.y. 99% kad niekada :) >> >> >> >> On 2018-04-16 14:37, gediminas wrote: >>> Tame linke tik teigiama, kad JT atmete rusijos pasiulyma. Bet taip ir >>> neaiskus koks tas pasiulymas. Tai visgi ka ten tokio rusija siulo, kad >>> JT nepritaria? >>> Kiti siulo daryti nepriklausoma tyrima, kodel Rusija ji vetuoja? Ar >>> netinka, kad bus nepriklausomas? >>> >>>> https://newsone.ua/news/politics/sovbez-oon-otklonil-rezolyuciyu-rossii-o-rassledovanii-ximicheskix-atak-v-sirii.html >>>> >>>> >>>> specialiai kaip tau is ukru saito. >>>> >>>> "gediminas" wrote in message news:pb1og7$lu7$1@trimpas.omnitel.net... >>>> >>>> Koki varianta rusai siulo? >>>> >>>>> vetuoja ne tyrima, o amerikosu rezoliucija, kuriame dar pries tyrima >>>>> suverciama kalte rusams ir patvirtinama numanoma ataka, kaip faktas. >>>>> Rusai gi visa laika siulo ir kitoki varianta su tyrimu. >>>>> >>>>> "gediminas" wrote in message news:pb1kdv$hv0$1@trimpas.omnitel.net... >>>>> >>>>> O kodel Rusija JT vetuoja cheminiu ataku tyrima Sirijoj? >>>>> >>>>>> o tai tipo, balsavimas JT turetu but toks, koki JAV nurodo? Tiek >>>>>> JAV , tiek Rusija yra tu rezoliuciju blokavusi, tad kieno marionete >>>>>> ta JT? >>>>>> >>>>>> "vedarinis" <vedarai@kaip.gerai> schrieb im Newsbeitrag >>>>>> news:pat9lr$anc$1@trimpas.omnitel.net... >>>>>>> Tam paciam straipsny parasyta, del ko JT yra tapus kacapyno >>>>>>> marionete, jei ka. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Gintas" <apsaugok nuo Tomo durnumo@gmail.com> Wrote in message: >>>>>>>> ?Konvencij? pa?eidimas nesuteikia teis?s naudoti j?g??, ? sak? >>>>>>>> pagalbos organizacijos ?Gydytojai be sien?? (MSF) teis?s klausim? >>>>>>>> direktor? Francoise Saulnier. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- >>>>>>> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/ >>>>> >>> >