well I don't consider palestinians people, their nation to be real, that they have anything to be liberated from but themselves, that colonialism still exists or that this is an occupation so what now, leftist

I can't help but feel the UN saying it 'reaffirms' the legitimacy of armed struggle feels like playing both sides of the field; most times armed struggles succeed (Gaza is a somewhat unique case in that they've been walled up like fish in a barrel, and they can't actually retaliate when they're being genocided), and if the UN wants for there to be dialogue with the liberated nation then they have no choice but to say they affirm the struggle for liberation; if the struggle fails, they continue their relationship with the colonizers and no harm no foul.

If they were genuine, they would vote to never acknowledge the state of Israel and to do everything in their power to ensure it fails; compare everything the UN did for Ukraine vs what they're doing with Israel. If/When Israel finally ethnically cleanses the Palestinians from the occupied territory, the UN will simply continue business as usual with Israel like no crimes were ever committed.

Also they can't say they don't affirm the legitimacy of the struggle because the struggle will happen with or without their acceptance; no oppressed nation waits for the permission of a pack of clowns to fight back, and even without their support they'll still have the support of people around the world anyway. The freedom fighters in Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan and Iraq didn't have the UN's approval to fight back, but they did anyway, and member nations of the UN were free to send their soldiers to be slaughtered there if they saw fit.

independence, territorial integrity, national unity

These are mutually contradictory goals.

They had to stop him before he did a China Social Credit Score Disinformation Doublespeak.

chinese foreign policy has quite a few bruh moments

there's dozens of us

DOZENS!

SexMachineStalin here got tied to a missile and fired at Tel Aviv

Don't harm non-cobatant civilians, but obliterate the heck out of their army and violent settlers

I don't think that applies for military conflict between states. Pretty sure the justification used there is another UN resolution that essentially freezes borders to what they were that year and doesn't allow for territorial change using military conflict or something along those lines.

The justification for Ukraine is territorial integrity, the ruling China is alluding to can easily apply to the Donbass, Luhansk, and Crimean republics

Donbas, Lubansk, and Crimea all have a right to self-determination and declared their independence.

It would be more like if Ireland invaded Northern Ireland. NI is part of the UK just like Donetsk was part of Ukraine, but it would be perverse to consider Ireland a colonizer in that context given the ethnic makeup and history of the place.

Maybe at worst you can frame it as Russian revanchism but even to go that far you have to simply discard any memory of the decade long civil war and politics of brutality that took place there before Russia got involved.