What is the primary intention of the author?1 pointa) To expose the USA’s inconsistent stance on Israel-Palestine issueb) To appreciate the USA for its bold movec) To appreciate the UN for taking a stand on Israel-Palestine issued) To denounce Israel’s stance on the UN resolution

U.N Vote on Palestine  What is the article about? Why did the U.S vote this way?  Who are the five permanent members of the UN?

Directions: Read the following two passages and answer the questions asked at the end of each passage. The candidates must note that answers to the questions must be based on the passages only.PASSAGE 1The UN General Assembly vote on a resolution calling for the final settlement of Jerusalem through negotiations may have been pitched as a contest between Israel and Palestine; however, it became a referendum on U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to recognise the city as Israel’s capital. The final outcome should force the U.S. to rethink its move, with 128 of the UNGA’s 193 member-countries voting for the resolution, and only nine against it. Among those voting for the resolution “ deeply regretted” the US decisions were its NATO allies, Germany, The UK and France. It’s Asian allies Japan and South Korea, it’s closest neighbour Canada and Mexico chose merely to abstain.The overwhelming majority ignored Mr. Trump and his UN Ambassador Nikki Haley’s threats that all countries that defied America no would be ‘named and shamed’ and face cancellation of U.S. aid.The suggestion was that the U.S. would exact its revenge by refusing to support these countries when they next need it at the UN. Israel showed deep derision for the world body, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to as a “house of lies”, while his UN envoy called the 128 countries “puppets forced to dance”. Such threats and epithets mark new lows in international diplomacy, and Israel and the U.S. come away looking like churlish bullies for issuing them. With all its weaknesses, the UN is a global collective, and it is imperative to acknowledge its mandate when such a large number of nations speak in one voice.The U.S. only recently asserted its intention to uphold the international rules-based order in its National Security Strategy document. It cannot now just walk away from both UN resolutions and its national commitment to the Israel-Palestine peace process by unilaterally changing its stand on the status of Jerusalem, without being accused of doublespeak.1. Who among the following were referred to as – “puppets forced to dance”.1 pointa) Those who voted in favour of resolutionb) Those who voted against the resolutionc) Those who restrained from voting on the resolutiond) The USA & Israel

The introduction of the essay effectively presents the rhetorical situation of the argument. The topic revolves around the humanitarian crisis in Palestine, and the purpose of the argument is to advocate for the urgent need for international intervention. The context is set within the ongoing conflict in Palestine.The introduction indeed makes a clear major claim that presents the writer’s perspective on and response to the conversation around the chosen issue. The claim is that the international community needs to intervene to address the humanitarian crisis in Palestine.The body paragraphs of the essay include topic sentences, supporting claims, evidence, and analysis of that evidence. For instance, in the section titled "Evidence of Genocide", the topic sentence is "The author presents evidence to support the claim that genocide is occurring in Palestine." The supporting claims include the systematic oppression and violence inflicted upon the Palestinian people by the Israeli government, the displacement of Palestinian communities, and the denial of the right of return to refugees. The evidence is the author's own observations and analysis.The author employs various rhetorical strategies in their argument. For example, the author uses ethos by presenting themselves as a knowledgeable and credible source on the topic. They also use pathos by appealing to the reader's emotions with descriptions of the humanitarian crisis. Lastly, they use logos by presenting logical arguments and evidence to support their claims.An aspect of the essay that caught my attention was the author's call for solidarity with the Palestinian people and a commitment to working towards a just and lasting peace in the region. This demonstrates the author's passion for the topic and their desire for positive change.A section in the essay that I felt needed more explanation or organization was the "Obstacles to International Intervention". The author could have provided more detail on the specific geopolitical interests and diplomatic alliances that are preventing international intervention.Other constructive notes for the author would be to provide more concrete examples and data to support their claims, and to consider addressing potential counterarguments to strengthen their argument.

Imagine yourself to be the delegate of Israel/Palestine, write a speech proposing solutions to the ongoing conflict. (to be answered by delegates who have opted for UNGA, UNEP, ECOSOC, UNHRC)

Select the correct text in the passage.Which paragraph uses rhetoric to convey the idea that the United States must have adequate military preparation to deal with other nations?President John F. Kennedy's Inaugural Address (1961)excerpt from National Archives     Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.     We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.     But neither can two . . . powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course—both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly armed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.     So let us begin anew—remembering . . . that civility1 is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.     Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms—and bring the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute control of all nations.