Are you not doing the same thing?
Seeing that old timgaul has quietened down for a bit, maybe a fuller explanation.
Firstly, yes - caught out!
Secondly, I see the UN as an organisation that has changed and grown over time, from a smallish one, not all that representative, more under the influence of the WWII Allies including the old colonial powers, to a much larger and more representative one. The original Partition Plan resolution was passed by 30 ( +3 "due to United States pressure" ) votes out of 56, with 10 abstentions. The plan did not call for taking the wishes of the inhabitants into account ( Jewish and Arab ), and was voted against by ALL surrounding countries then in the UN, including Greece, India and Turkey. The plan was also a stuffup in terms of allocation of territory, percentage-wise, but then they all started fighting, the Arabs attacked, the Jews escalated the guerrilla war they had been busy with prior to the plan, and it ended up with Israel taking far more than granted in the plan. So I battle to see that the state of Israel in 1949 was fully legal.
The UN has become way more representative - in 1967 it had 123 members, and so on. The growth leads to greater validity of its wishes. But the veto rights of the 5 countries in the security council, and the political influence of some of the bigger members ( the USA for one ) means that resolutions that most member states might want are either never brought up, or vetoed. I suppose that that means that resolutions that are passed generally do reflect the wishes of the majority of nations. Depending on definition, there are about 200 sovereign states in the world, so from about 1961 on the UN gets fairly representative ( 103 members, over half the world ), in the rwenzori book of the UN LOL!
