be it Iran and Russia or Israel and the US”, and my whole point is one of those countries is normal, two aren’t, and the last one should be normal, but very much is not.

Frankly, none of these countries is normal at all. It is a bit concerning that you apparently think otherwise.

So when you put the four in a sentence, it sounds reasonable to assume everyone can call on a veto whenever

Not everyone, but two of these CAN call a veto whenever, to the benefit of whoever… Why should we pretend it isn’t so? Again, while you’re apparently very much focussed on who actually used the veto when, I am not. I am criticising the fact that the mere possibility exists.

This is a digression, but: this is not trivia. Accession control is vote control.

Yea… pretty hard to establish an international institution to handle international relation between countries if you end up using your vetos for countries you don’t even have any direct dispute with just to mess with your opponent. Political power play, no reason to actually go to war over.

Or, in fact, was Iran really only attacked last week?

Was Iran attacked by Israel before they started to fund and steer all of their terror pawns in Arab countries several decades ago? Before they announced their objective to eliminate Israel?

That some fatcats are warrant-proof is true, though.

…and these fatcats can extend their shield against any warrant to anyone. That is a problem.

IDK, they’re already making excuses, what’s one more?

Talk is cheap. Actually pushing the button that will end the wold isn’t.