If each country gets to forbid entry, or forbid certain positions, to those it dislikes, the organization folds.
Originally Posted by Twitchy
Let me put it another way. If a country pre-emptively invades and occupies other countries, if it tortures, murders civilians, and hold prisoners indefinitely; if it ignores international law and attacks funerals and rescuers, if it funds an apartheid state that keeps a whole people in large prison camps in squalid poverty, is it (the United States) a good candidate for the security council? Some might say not. And yet, the US feels differently.
As for the original story, this is a step in the right direction for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. One of the biggest obstacles to peace is the complete assymetry between the parties in terms of political power. The Israelis apparently see little reason to give up anything, when they can just take what they want by force whenever it suits them.
…authoritarian followers drive through life under the influence of impaired thinking a lot more than most people do, exhibiting sloppy reasoning, highly compartmentalized beliefs, double standards, hypocrisy, self-blindness, a profound ethnocentrism, and—to top it all off—a ferocious dogmatism that makes it unlikely anyone could ever change their minds with evidence or logic. These seven deadly shortfalls of authoritarian thinking eminently qualify them to follow a would-be dictator.