[dotancohen]

And today they are promoted by second and third world countries who oppose the first world, specifically to divide the first world nations.

They are succeeding.

[ViewTrick1002]

This sounds to me like you are trying portray poorer countries as lesser worth because they had the guts of calling Israel out.

The solution to rich countries being divided on an the issue of an ongoing genocide is you know, not committing said genocide.

[dotancohen]

  > This sounds to me like you are trying portray poorer countries as lesser worth because they had the guts of calling Israel out.

No, I'm portraying non-US-aligned nations as having an interest in dividing the US-aligned nations.

What does "poorer" have anything to do with it? Is that some tactic to garner sympathy?

[ViewTrick1002]

> However, Third World is still used as a (pejorative) term for the traditionally less-developed world (e.g. Africa)

So now the entire west, NATO and other US allies should with blinded conviction approve of the genocide?

This seems like you are afraid of isolation and the fallout of the ongoing genocide.

There’s cracks showing and you know when they open Israel will lose its privileged position.

[throwaway3060]

Many (not all) of those countries are fine with when it's a member of the second or third worlds committing atrocities. So no, there's no guts here. They perceive it's in their interest to call out some acts but not others - just like almost everyone else.

[raxxorraxor]

It doesn't take "guts" to call out Israel in the forum of the UN. It is in 95% of cases just simple populism and nobody has to fear any consequences.