apathoid
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2001 3:19 pm

What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 4:29 pm

I was just pondering...what do you think the international reaction would be if an American "religious freedom fighter" (read: terrorist) were to hijack an aircraft and fly it into the UN?

I mean, the justification so many give for what the WTC killers did was American arrogance, America meddling in foreign affairs and America always tries to tell everyone else what to do and think. Kind of like what the UN does to America.

So, to those who think we should try and "understand," let me know: What would you say if we asked you to understand when we blow up the UN?
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 5:25 pm

Look, If you really want to get into the world of hypotheticals why do you think someone would want to fly a plane into the UN building?

QANTASforever
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3506
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 5:45 pm

The UN doesn't have an history like the US has, which could explain (I DIDN'T SAY JUSTIFY) any revenge from some groups of people.
That's the point you didn't get.

That doesn't mean that some terrorists wouldn't be glad to bomb the UN. And ? What do you want to prove ?
 
PPGMD
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2001 5:39 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 6:28 pm

The UN and other countries are only saying that because they aren't a deciding factor in the war on terror. They want to have some say on what we are doing (which in the long and short run will produce inaction), we said BS, either help us or we will go at it alone if need be to protect our borders.

The UN is in horrible shape many of the resolutions and events happening there are being consumed with poltics and bickering, they are getting little done that needs to be done. If they don't shape up soon, they are going to be like the league of nations, and if we have a president with enough balls to him we might just pull out completely and tell them to get out of our country too.
At worst, you screw up and die.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4804
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 9:07 pm

Apathoid,

No-one has been trying to JUSTIFY the attacks on the US. There's a GIGANTIC difference between justifying the attacks and looking for reasons why some people might have committed this INJUSTIFIABLE act.

As for the UN: the UN only 'tells the US what to do' on the world scene, in other words, it tells the US that it can't just tell everyone else what to do. And guess what: that's one of the reasons why it was created, so that no one state would go around bossing the others around. Oh, and the UN does this to every country on the planet.

Now on to your question: if an American terrorist were to blow up the UN, we'd be outraged at that person and the group he represented. No-one in their right mind would suggest going to war with the US because of what one of their countrymen did.

BTW, if you say the UN does to the US what the US does to the world, I have one question: when was the last time the UN threatened to bomb the US?
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 9:17 pm

As for the UN: the UN only 'tells the US what to do' on the world scene, in other words, it tells the US that it can't just tell everyone else what to do. And guess what: that's one of the reasons why it was created, so that no one state would go around bossing the others around. Oh, and the UN does this to every country on the planet.

The UN has no power over the US, Scorpio-none. Tell me this: if the U.S. decides to go to war with Iraq without a UN resolution, who is going to stop it? The UN? How? Last time I checked, the UN doesn't have a standing army to stop the U.S. The U.S. will still go do what it thinks is in it's national interest.

Oh, and the UN doesn't do this to every country on the planet-the old Soviet Union ignored the UN for 40 years, and the UN could do nothing but wring it's collective hands over it. In the long run, the UN can do NOTHING to any large state.

 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 9:53 pm

The UN has no power over the US, Scorpio-none. Tell me this: if the U.S. decides to go to war with Iraq without a UN resolution, who is going to stop it? The UN? How? Last time I checked, the UN doesn't have a standing army to stop the U.S. The U.S. will still go do what it thinks is in it's national interest.

Oh, and the UN doesn't do this to every country on the planet-the old Soviet Union ignored the UN for 40 years, and the UN could do nothing but wring it's collective hands over it. In the long run, the UN can do NOTHING to any large state.


If this is the case, then i really wonder what the whole purpose of the UN really is? If it has no authority and no nation will listen to it, then what's the point of the UN?


In Arsene we trust!!
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 10:08 pm

If this is the case, then i really wonder what the whole purpose of the UN really is? If it has no authority and no nation will listen to it, then what's the point of the UN?

It was a Utopian idea that emerged from the ashes of World War II. It had a noble cause, I think: to let all nations have an "equal" voice in a world body, where the smallest had as much legitimacy as the largest, but the real world doesn't work that way. The U.S., China, Russia, Britian, France, etc, really don't want to share the world stage with the little pin-prick nations of the world. They will, in the long run, do what they think is best for their nation, no matter what the UN says.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4804
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 10:09 pm

Alpha 1,

Tell me this: if the U.S. decides to go to war with Iraq without a UN resolution, who is going to stop it? The UN? How? Last time I checked, the UN doesn't have a standing army to stop the U.S.

That's the whole point! The UN can not enforce its resolutions, and therefore they are not a threat to ANYONE, least of all the US, hence taking away every reason to 'attack' it, as Apathoid suggests. But the UN is the spokesperson for the whole world, and although the US CAN ignore it, it would be plain STUPID to just ignore what the rest of the world thinks and go your own way in someone elses country. That's asking, no begging, for trouble, on your knees.

Oh, and the UN doesn't do this to every country on the planet-the old Soviet Union ignored the UN for 40 years,

Yes, and we all know how everybody LOVED the Soviet Union, don't we?  Insane
If that is the example you want the US to follow...

In the long run, the UN can do NOTHING to any large state.

But that should not be a freebode to the US to do whatever the hell it wants. The US, like every other country, should justify the actions it undertakes outside its borders to the rest of the world, as these actions interfere WITH the rest of the world. This should not be a game of 'I'm stronger than you, so I'm the boss'.
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3506
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 10:33 pm

I guess Alpha-1 has explained why so many people hate the US: USA just don't care about what other think, and are so powerful that they just act to defend their own interests against interests of other countries.
Nothing more simple.
I guess we all agree now. So why always fighting ?
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Wed Sep 25, 2002 10:44 pm

I guess Alpha-1 has explained why so many people hate the US: USA just don't care about what other think, and are so powerful that they just act to defend their own interests against interests of other countries.

Uh, last time I checked Sebolino, the charge of the United States goverment was TO ACT TO DEFEND THE INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES!!! What part of that DON'T you understand, boy? ROTFL. The United States is not in this world to be responsible for YOUR country-that's YOUR country's responsibility, last time I checked. Extending the U.S.'s responsibilities to all the other nations of the world is the height of idiocy. We have to look out for ourselves, because left to you, and the likes of you in the world, the US would be at the mercy of everyone else.

 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3506
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 1:35 am

ALPHA-1:

Why are you repeating what I say, boy ?
Did you miss something in my post, boy ?

"TO ACT TO DEFEND THE INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES!!! "

That's precisely what I say, kid.
 
apathoid
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 1:39 am

Actually, the UN does presume to tel the US what to do on its own soil....take a look at the Man and the Biosphere project or the Nation's Rivers Heritage Act. Those programs are the source of a great deal of our animosity to the UN.

Personally, I don't recognize the UN as a governing body, but I DO recognize it as a threat to my national sovreignty.

Aside from that, the question posed was: Would international opinion be as sympathetic to the US as it has been to Al Queda if the roles were reversed?
 
GDB
Posts: 12679
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 2:16 am

The UN might have worked better if certain nations, not just the US, hadn't used it for cynical reasons in the cold war. The vetoes by Security Council members for instance.
It might work better if the US didn't not keep withholding payments, pulling out of programmes every so often.

Those in the US government who have to deal with the world, the State Department, must get exasperated by such actions, as they know full well that it never serves the US's long-term interests, but is pure political grandstanding to appease the knuckle-dragging element of the population, done by insular, fear-mongering ultra-right wingers for their own short-term political advangtage.

For instance, the Bush administration pulling funding from contraception/health programmes for the third world, (the EU replaced the funding), just to appease the swivel-eyed Bible-thumpers in the Republican Party.
I don't think that many in the US realise how much even US allies hold Bush & co in contempt for things like that, they get the feeling that they are not dealing with rational people, a sort of Christian Taliban.
For people like Blair, Bush's ideological extremists make his job of getting support for his policy towards helping the US very difficult. And the contempt for the UN and international agreements generally by the US just magnifies these problems.

Sometimes the UN are right, how many in the US now wish they'd listened to the UN when it criticized the US policy in Vietnam back in the 60's?
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 2:17 am

Sebolino, stop blowing smoke up peoples' rear end ok? Read your quote again, son:

I guess Alpha-1 has explained why so many people hate the US: USA just don't care about what other think, and are so powerful that they just act to defend their own interests against interests of other countries.

Translation: the US is always putting it's own interests ahead of other countries-that's what you meant, and you know it. And I was calling you on it. You were not saying the same thing I was-you're not smart enough to do that.
 
Guest

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 2:28 am

Sebolino,

I guess Alpha-1 has explained why so many people hate the US: USA just don't care about what other think, and are so powerful that they just act to defend their own interests against interests of other countries.


I am from America and I care greatly what the world thinks (I think a lot of us do, but we may still the minority). Heck, I am still hugely embarassed by/ mad at our republican party for airing Billie C's Dirty laundry for all to see.
 
KROC
Posts: 18919
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 11:19 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 2:38 am

Look, America sucks, because America will handle it's business in a manor that is in the best interests for America, and it's people. Goddamn...what an awful concept that is.  Yeah sure
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4804
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 2:48 am

Apathoid,

Aside from that, the question posed was: Would international opinion be as sympathetic to the US as it has been to Al Queda if the roles were reversed?

ROTFLMAO!!! You really do live on planet gaga, don't you? I mean, come on, get your damn facts straight before posting total bullsh*t like that! Can you tell me what exactly it is that you've seen to suggest that international opinion is 'sympathetic to Al Queda'? Come on, please do, that should be fun to read...
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 2:55 am

Would international opinion be as sympathetic to the US as it has been to Al Queda if the roles were reversed?

International opinion sympathetic to Al Qaeda? Are you off your rocker? I have yet to see a single state, including Iraq, go on the record expressing sympathy for Al Qaeda.

No one is denying the US the right to act in their own national interest if they choose. However, what most of the world takes exception to is that the US tries to have it both ways. You simply can't ignore the UN on some issues while use UN mandates as your platform on others without smelling of hypocrisy.

The US has traditionally been the strongest supporter of the UN and I don't think that a half-century of strong relations will be eroded by one stubborn admininstration's refusal to be diplomatic about their intentions. So before you start declaring war on a building in midtown Manhattan, perhaps you should look at the bigger picture.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
tbar220
Posts: 6706
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 12:08 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 3:10 am

Heck, the way I see it, the UN Is a joke and an ineffective institute. Just look at the "racism" conference fiasco. Pathetic really.
NO URLS in signature
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 3:17 am

If the UN went away I wouldn't cry one tear but I would never wish it to go the way of the WTC. Personally, I hope the US pulls out of the UN; then sits back and watches it implode.
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 5:36 am

if an american right wing christain blew up mecca or blew up the untied nations then all hell would break loose, somehow because its an attack on america its an attack on all the ills of the world and the poor little people had no choice because those natsy americans are taking over the world.....
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
apathoid
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 5:42 am

All right Canada, YOU at least get my point. The voice of reason is alive in a few places anyway,
 
OO-AOG
Posts: 1395
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2000 1:24 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 5:44 am

Yes the UN might be against your interests because the goal of this organization is the defend the interests...Of the World (You know these +120 small countries, ever heard of them?)

Bush is probably even more dangerous than Saddam, because NOBODY (even not the UN) can't do ANYTHING against his unilateral decisions. This guy is just about to declare a war to defend his own interests even if most countries worldwide are against it. Amazing, everybody will just seat back and watch the show on CNN international with all the 'heroes' fighting for the petrol (oups I mean freedom of course Big grin) of the world. Now should we laugh of should we cry, I don't know...

Falcon....like a limo but with wings
 
Guest

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 5:52 am

Guess the truth hurts, no one likes being told they are not a good neighbour. But the measure of maturity of a neighbour is how they act once they are told.

Some will sit down and look at the reasons, others will makes silly excuses and others will rant and rave and tell us that they have every right to do what they like.

Alpha1, you are wrong, wrong, wrong. America has every right to do what they want within their borders and to protect their borders. But apart from that, they have no legitimate right to do anything else unless they have world support. That's what the UN is for, a voice of the world. I'm aware you think it's irrelevant, but that's only because it's no longer a conduit for the American voice, as it used to be when it was making illegal mandates that start 50+ years of war.

It seems to me that the little brothers and sisters have learnt how to voice their opinions, and they're learning that big brother is the schoolyard bully ......




VH-ADG
 
GDB
Posts: 12679
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:04 am

If Sept 11th teaches anything, it's that even the most powerful nation on Earth is not immune to attack.
Misguided foreign policy years back, expediency, old religious hatreds, failed states allowed to fester, all this and more can get mixed into a deadly brew.
To be effective against disparate, scattered, fanatical, close-knit terror cells, the US will needs the help of many nations, sometimes unstable ones at that.
The UN is the main conduit for this.
An semi-isolationist, unilateral stance just won't work, remember loony-tune John Ashcroft's first act on taking office in 2001, cutting anti-terror funding and diverting it to fighting pornography.
Want to trust your security totally to the CIA? With their record, in-fighting with other agencies and laughably poor human intelligence sources in the Middle East?

I think it's sad that a proportion of Americans see the UN as some kind of enemy, it wasn't just idealism that set it up, it was seen as good for the US, and good for the world.
When the US has been properly engaged with the world, it's foreign policy has truly done great things, enhancing US security when doing so.
But those in the US who oversaw the UN's formation were great men, not the corrupt, rabble-rousing, ignorant political pygmies that makes up so much of the current administration, poor Colin Powell, he must be a lonely man in Washington.

A poll today shows that despite the rather thin 'Dossier On Iraq's WMD' being published, 75% of the British public are not in favour of joining a US attack against Iraq WITHOUT UN approval.
Most want Saddam gone, but with a proper mandate.
Polling also shows the figures are not much different when US citizens are asked the same question, so let Bush try crude political mud-slinging against the democrat's on this most serious of issues. (Anything to do with the mid-term elections?)
Most people are reasonable and sensible in the US, sure the UN may be a bit irritating every now and then, but imagine the last 50+ years without it, it could have been much worse.
But a proper sense of history, not just trying to sell yourself as the new 'Churchill', (yeah right), is so absent from this administration.
 
jessman
Posts: 1457
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 1:11 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 6:10 am

The UN is a joke. If any of the members of the UNSC decieded to do something without UN approval they're too big for the UN to do anything about it.

The UN is a tool to further the interests of the powerful nations while providing the illusion that they're for the little countries. They could care less about the little countries. Some Hutus kill some Tutsis (sp?) UN doesn't do anything. Millions of africans kill each other in Ruanda and the Democratic Reupblic of Congo (Formerly Zaire). UN doesn't do anything. Many well informed people think that Iraq is building chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. The UN doesn't want to do anything about it.

This reminds me of the league of nations. Japan invades china; the league doesn't care. Italy takes some African countries, the league doesn't care. Not caring came back in WWII. The UN was set up to do better than that, to actually have some teeth. If they don't do anything, I completely expect the time for widespread human slaughter.

**ROUND 3** ding ding
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 7:47 am

This guy is just about to declare a war to defend his own interests even if most countries worldwide are against it.

Sounds like a leader to me, who will do what's in the best interest of his nation even if the whole world is against him. I'd rather have that than someone who will read a useless poll from London or Paris or Sydney everyday.

Alpha1, you are wrong, wrong, wrong. America has every right to do what they want within their borders and to protect their borders. But apart from that, they have no legitimate right to do anything else unless they have world support.

Bullshit, ADG. Plain bullshit. If the US thinks this guy is trying to get WMD's to launch not only against an ally, but against US troops or interests, the US has EVERY RIGHT to protect it's interests abroad, and screw the world if the interests of the US aren't important to the rest of the world. We have EVERY RIGHT to do this to defend our citizens, be they within our borders or outside; whether to defend our troops inside or outside our borders; whether to defend our interests, be they inside our outside our borders.

Left to your thinking, the US has no right to go into Afghanistan. Well, you're way of thinkiing will get a lot of people killed, and lose a lot of their people their freedom, ADG. So you can piously call me "wrong, wrong, wrong", but I think it's you, as usual, who are wrong in this matter.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 7:51 am

Some Hutus kill some Tutsis (sp?) UN doesn't do anything. Millions of africans kill each other in Ruanda and the Democratic Reupblic of Congo (Formerly Zaire). UN doesn't do anything

Unfortunately, the sad truth is that from an economic standpoint, ALL those lives put together were barely as valuable as a single American life. To put it bluntly, no one cares about Africans dying because they simply aren't important enough in the larger world context. The United Nations was right not to intervene in those matters, simply because the cost involved would have been too high and the benefits obtained too few. Better to let them kill each other off and then sort it all out once they stop.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 7:54 am

The US has EVERY RIGHT to protect it's interests abroad

Just curious, but what exactly is a "US interest abroad". If its abroad, meaning not in the US, then its pretty hard for me to see how the US has any rights, or duties, associated with it.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
OO-AOG
Posts: 1395
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2000 1:24 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 8:03 am

Sounds like a leader to me, who will do what's in the best interest of his nation even if the whole world is against him.

Then Alpha1 what's the difference with lets say...Saddam Hussein...another leader with the world against him I guess... both have nothing to do with international laws or simply the UN...
Must be a war of leaders I guess, Oh you think you're smarter than I, let me show you my weapons.....Is that what you call a leader in the 21st century... very interesting leadership.
Falcon....like a limo but with wings
 
jessman
Posts: 1457
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 1:11 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 8:24 am

But B747-437B; When is the United Nations right to do anything?
The interests of China, for example, are different than the interests of the United States. When those interests are in conflict which one should take priority?

What's the UN going to do if the USA invades Iraq without UN authorization? Are they going to get China, Russia, France and others to invade the USA? If they are to live up to what they are meant to be they should. But they won't. What about if China has all sorts of human rights violations in Tibet?

What if the Russians want to put down the Chechens? How is that different from Israel wanting to put down the Palestinians?

The UN turns away when a big member does anything questionable.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 8:42 am

What's the UN going to do if the USA invades Iraq without UN authorization? Are they going to get China, Russia, France and others to invade the USA?


Just let them try it, every rooftop, woodshed, treehouse is going to be a snipers nest.

OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
pacificjourney
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:12 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:09 am

Thanks L-188 now they will know where to find all the inbred hill-billies ...

Um, I believe jessamn was speaking hypothetically ...
" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "
 
jessman
Posts: 1457
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 1:11 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:10 am

B747-437B
US Interests Abroad include the following
a. US Military Bases and troops; We have troops and equipment all over the world. This allowed the USA to keep conventional war from ever reaching its mainland. That has always been the idea and the plan of keeping the military around the world. Also we have troops in many countries for humanitarian purposes.

b. US citizens traveling or living abroad. We tried to get the captives away from the terrorists in the Philipines. We tried to find and get Daniel Pearl, we weren't successful but we tried. I'm guessing that you are an American Citizen, What if you were kidnapped in India by Pakistani extremists. By your reasoning the US would have no right or duty to do anything to help you. You were abroad of your own free will.

c. US corporations operating abroad; Under the constitution Corporations are often considered individuals.

d. Existing treaties and trade agreements. The USA does depend on imports. The USA is the single largest importer of goods in the world. Also we have treaties with NATO and other International/Intergovernmental organizations that require our action. If Saddam Hussein had invaded, say, Turkey (a NATO member) we would be required by our contract to fight with Turkey against Iraq. Those in power at the USA feel that an attack is imminent as long as Saddam is in power; thus we have an obligation to strike.

Perhaps the USA should pull its troops from the rest of the world. Perhaps we should ignore every terrorist that kidnaps our citizens abroad. Perhaps we should sit idly by and wait for the war to come to us. God forbid we chase our enemies back to their country, though. We have no right to do that. And God Forbid the UN do anything to help us out when the war comes to our shores, it wouldn't be right for them to interfere. We'll just keep the enemy from getting through our border, work only defensive strategy. No war was ever won on defense alone.
 
jessman
Posts: 1457
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 1:11 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:20 am

"Inbred hill-billies" can be pretty good shots, thank you very much.
Yes I was speaking hypothetically.

I have some 1500 names on a computer family tree that I built, (Family Tree Maker) and according to it I am not only myself, but I am my 5th cousin and I am my 6th cousin Big grin

I still managed to get a 30 composite on my ACT, a 5 on my AP Calculus exam; a full academic scholarship to the local University, and I can be pretty good with a rifle  Smile
 
pacificjourney
Posts: 2659
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2001 9:12 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:36 am

Jessman

"I still managed to get a 30 composite on my ACT, a 5 on my AP Calculus exam; a full academic scholarship to the local University, and I can be pretty good with a rifle".

I assume this is meant to impress though it means zero to me, with just 1 B.sc (Canterbury), M.A. (Cambridge), M.Sc (South Queensland) and actually a job to show for it why would it.


.. and for all that supposed intellectual ability you will still be up some tree shooting at invading Chinese ... who aren't there ? Say hello to L-188 for us and don't forget to duck.
" Help, help ... I'm being oppressed ... "
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:39 am

Jessman, US interests abroad are no different from other countries' interests abroad, with the possible exception of the military assets. I'm not a US citizen, but I spend about two-thirds of my time traveling away from my home country. Ironically, the only time I ever had to turn to my embassy to protect my rights was because the United States chose to violate them. But that's not relevant here. My simple point remains that it is a double standard to say that the US is ok to invade Iraq to protect its interests in the region, but at the same time condemn Iraq for invading Kuwait in order to protect Iraqi interests in the region. I don't object to the US asserting its power anywhere it chooses - thats a reality that the world has to come to terms with - but to attempt to bully the world AND assume the moral high ground while doing so is highly presumptuous.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
apathoid
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 9:58 am

Well that was a valid argument, B-747.  Insane

While the paranoid delusionals on here will tell you differently, our purpose in ousting Sadam is to protect ourselves from further attack, and, yes, protect our oil interests in the Middle East.

Sadam's invasion of Kuwait was predatory and imperialistic. Hardly a valid comparison. Try again.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 10:03 am

curious, but what exactly is a "US interest abroad". If its abroad, meaning not in the US, then its pretty hard for me to see how the US has any rights, or duties, associated with it.

C'mon Sean, you know better than that. If it's something that affect the security of the United States, even if it's 10,000 miles away, the US has a right to see that it's security and interests are looked after.

Let me pose a hypothetical to you: Let's say Saddam Hussein DOES have WMD's-let's say chemical weapons, and he launches them at the new Qatari airbase where US troops are stationed, doesn't that warrent the US respond to such an attack? Of course it does. Now, that's certainly outside the boundaries of the US, isn't it? In that case, we do have EVERY RIGHT to respond to such an attack.

Then Alpha1 what's the difference with lets say...Saddam Hussein...

One difference OO-AOG: even though Iraq has spit in the face of the world for 11 years in regards to weapons inspections he agreed to, no one is really demanding he do so. On the other hand, the world is in hysterics because President Bush wants to do something about this thug who has a history of starting conflicts, and who is seeking, or who has, WMD's. That's the difference.


My simple point remains that it is a double standard to say that the US is ok to invade Iraq to protect its interests in the region, but at the same time condemn Iraq for invading Kuwait in order to protect Iraqi interests in the region.

That invasion had nothing to do with "Iraqi interests". It had everything to do with conquest, nothing else. I know a while back SAS23 tried to say Iraq had some kind of legitimate claim to Kuwait, but that's nonsense. This was pure agrression, just like Iran in 1980. Nothing more, nothing less.

And I don't see where it's a double standard, simply because the US can project power globally and others can't. That's just a reality, not a double standard.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 10:07 am

Unfortunately, everyone's point of view is always going to be relative. Just as Saddam was pretty much alone in his belief back in 1990 that he had justification to invade Kuwait, the United States is pretty isolated in its belief today that Saddam poses a clear and present danger to the world. Whether or not he actually poses such a threat is not relevant, if the US is satisfied that he does then they are a sovereign nation and are entitled to act to counter it. The US may view it as proactive intervention, but others, with equally valid views, may view it as predatory and imperialistic.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
jessman
Posts: 1457
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 1:11 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 10:13 am

B747-437B;
If I remember correctly Iraq invaded Kuwait for conquest purposes, not exactly to protect its interests. I often disagree with US foreign policy, but we're all done with Manifest Destiny. We invaded Afghanistan, but we left it under Afghan rule. If we invade Iraq we would leave it under Iraqi rule; just not under Saddam.

When one country invades another that has a popular government (I hate to break this to you doves out there) the line between civilian and military will become blurred. The reason the US did not win in Vietnam is because the people of Vietnam didn't want the US to win. They would send their women and children with grenades against the Americans. Is a 12 yr old girl throwing a grenade at you a valid target? If so, do you really have the guts to shoot her?

If the people of Afghanistan wanted the Taliban in power, we would have been in even worse shape than the Russians were when they went there. If the Iraqis really wanted Saddam in power the Gulf war probably wouldn't have been over in 1991 without a mushroom cloud.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 10:45 am

This is where you begin to tread on very shaky ground. You and me are educated people who understand the subtleties of each situation and treat them on their own merits. Unfortunately, a majority of the world is not quite as lucky (heck, some of the people on this thread don't seem to be). Remember that Osama's entire manifesto was built upon his concept of "American imperialism" and its negative effects upon the Islamic way of life.

The arguments about guerilla tactics adopted by civilians are extremely valid points, but my belief is that that line has already been crossed. 19 erstwhile civilians used themselves as human projectiles to defend against what they perceived as an erosion of the way of life that they sought. You can either deal with it by projecting more power unilaterally, or you can examine the source of their dis-satisfaction and either modify it or educate its detractors about its true purpose more efficiently. Both courses of action have their merits, but only one is likely to be a long term solution.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
redngold
Posts: 6673
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 10:58 am

Interesting thought.

The last time we discussed something like this, it happened.

Please God, not again.

redngold
Up, up and away!
 
OO-AOG
Posts: 1395
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2000 1:24 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 11:16 am

President Bush wants to do something about this thug who has a history of starting conflicts, and who is seeking, or who has, WMD's. That's the difference

Bush has WMDs and will be starting a second war in less than a year. Unilateral declaration of war without UN approval, no respect of international laws. Saddam wanted to extend his borders, Bush wants the Oil : 2 dictators, No difference. Yes, a difference, Saddam is not claiming to defend the human rights and the world's freedom. USA government has reached another step in massive hypocrisy.
Falcon....like a limo but with wings
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 11:26 am

Saddam wanted to extend his borders, Bush wants the Oil : 2 dictators, No difference.

A very key difference is that Bush hasn't yet acted while Saddam did. But yes, if Bush acts in direct opposition to UN opinion, he will have forever forsaken the moral high ground that the US has rightfully claimed over the last 2 centuries.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada
 
apathoid
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 11:30 am

"You and me are educated people..."

Are you sure about that?  Insane
 
apathoid
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2001 3:19 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 11:35 am

Oh, and I just want to remind the poster who picked on L-188 for saying that America would defend herself from every roof top that if the Minutemen of the Revolution had not been willing to do this, there would be no America. I would fight to defend my country, especially if her sovreign soil were invaded. Hardly makes me a redneck, although that is the yoke you knee jerk liberals hang on us for feeling that way. You ought to be glad guys like us are willing to fight for you too, since you obviously won't fight for yourselves.
 
jessman
Posts: 1457
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 1:11 pm

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 11:59 am

B747-437B;
You can either deal with it by projecting more power unilaterally, or you can examine the source of their dis-satisfaction and either modify it or educate its detractors about its true purpose more efficiently
The problem is that their dis-satisfaction stems from the fact that Islam does not reign supreme over the world. Their premise is the world must convert to their form of Islam or be destroyed. Currently they see three "satans"; The United States; Israel; and India. Undoubtedly if one of these were to fall they would turn their attention to another group of "infidels" I'm not going to convert, and I'm not going to be destroyed without a fight.

I once heard a university professor say "Israel, The United States, even Jordan and Iraq, these will all fall; Islam will reign supreme" He truly believed that. It was a cause bigger than himself and he was proud of that. I must admit that I looked for his face on the list of hijackers soon after 11SEP. These guys are religious leaders who are bastardizing their religion to make this a religious cause. They look for students who think of themselves "first as a Muslim, and then mention my heritage and that I am an American citizen" http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/09/0910_muslimkids.html
Al Quida and other terrorist cells love this thinking, they manipulate kids even in America to fight the government of the "Great Satan"
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/06/11/suspect-usat.htm

Once they've turned down this path no ammount of talking or breath will turn them back, only an act of God himself would do. I will try to do my best to give the access to the words of life and peace the best I know how, but if they are not going to turn toward a peaceful coexistance with the heathen there is only one way to keep them from being a threat to the peace and security of the rest of the world, and that is to limit their numbers by any means necessary until they do not have the presence to pose a threat anymore.

I hate trying to figure out how to become the "thought police"; And I truly feel sorry for those who actively use Islam to promote peace. It seems their voices are being drowned out by the screams of the radicals.
 
B747-437B
Posts: 8777
Joined: Thu May 30, 2002 6:54 am

RE: What If The UN Was The Target?

Thu Sep 26, 2002 12:09 pm

Jessman, you are absolutely correct. The lunatic fringe exists in every religion, but alas the Islamic fringe is growing by the day and spreading its net globally. You have identified the problem, but not the solution. I don't claim to have the solution either. I do however know what the solution is NOT. Anyone who thinks that a unilateral war with Iraq is the solution is very naive.
"The A340-300 may boast a long range, but the A340 is underpowered" -- Robert Milton, CEO - Air Canada

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dreadnought, MileHighClubber, salttee and 20 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos