aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 9:54 am

I've got one simple question to help me understand why exactly some people oppose the UN so vehemently. So please tell me, what has the UN done to make you oppose it?

Please keep it civil, especially in case you comment on another a.net member's opinion. The question was kept that general on purpose.

[Edited 2004-12-31 01:57:04]
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
whitehatter
Posts: 5180
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 6:52 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:05 am

I'm not anti the UN, but I am exasperated at it constantly trying to be "all things to all men".

Rather than its closure I'd like to see meaningful dialogue from all sides about how it can be reformed and improved for the new century and beyond. The current talking shop where nothing gets done and vested interest reigns serves nobody except career diplomats and their staffs on huge salaries and benefits.

The EU Parliament is just as bad. Another powerless talking shop without any coherent direction or purpose.
Lead me not into temptation, I can find my own way there...
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:13 am

Most of its "critics" don´t have the faintest idea what the UN actually is, so they can´t make any meaningful remarks beyond cursing fire and brimstone upon it and ducking away from imagined black helicopters...  Insane
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:16 am

The U.N has done nothing to make me oppose it. It has simply not done anything to make me favor it. The U.S pays a large sum of the U.N money, and gets nothing in return. It is simply useless.

[Edited 2004-12-31 02:17:06]
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:21 am

"It has simply not done anything to make me favor it."

Would I then be correct in concluding that you don't like things (or also people) that have done nothing for you?
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Bravo7e7

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:22 am

Bravo7e7: The U.N has done nothing to make me oppose it. It has simply not done anything to make me favor it. The U.S pays a large sum of the U.N money, and gets nothing in return. It is simply useless.

Thank you for illustrating my point.  Insane
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:23 am

That is correct. Especially if I pay for them with my tax dollars. If I have a cleaning lady and pay for her, and she does not clean the house properly, then there is no point in having her.
 
Gman94
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:30 am

The U.N has done nothing to make me oppose it. It has simply not done anything to make me favor it. The U.S pays a large sum of the U.N money, and gets nothing in return. It is simply useless.

There's me thinking that the purpose of the UN was for the good of the whole world not just the good old USA.
British Airways - The Way To Fly
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:35 am

Gman94, you are correct. But the U.N has literally done nothing for the U.S. Definitely not on 9/11 when we needed them.
 
VonRichtofen
Posts: 4260
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2000 3:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:37 am

"Especially if I pay for them with my tax dollars."

A 16-20 year old student.....  Insane
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:39 am

Hello, I also have a job.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Bravo7e7

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:42 am

Bravo7e7: Gman94, you are correct. But the U.N has literally done nothing for the U.S. Definitely not on 9/11 when we needed them.

You´re undermining your already precariously weak stance on the issue ever more...

The UNSC immediately gave full support to the US and as soon as required also for the necessary response against the Taleban. The US has received everything they could ask for - and more - after and related to 9-11.

It was only the totally unrelated (and unjustified) Iraq invasion where the Bush administration met resistance (which was justified as we all know by now).

Sorry, but no lollipop - again.  Nuts
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:45 am

You are so right. They went the extra mile and did EVERYTHING they could. Thanks U.N! Big grin
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:48 am

"So please tell me, what has the UN done to make you oppose it?"

That would require the UN to actually *do* something wouldn't it? It's precisely their complete inaction in the Sudan, the Congo, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, etc, etc, combined with their absolutely toothless decrees that make me questions it's use. Has the UN ever followed through on any threat it's made?
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Bravo7e7

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:52 am

Bravo7e7: You are so right. They went the extra mile and did EVERYTHING they could. Thanks U.N!

You simply fell full flat on your face, just above. Sorry, but you asked for it.

What you seemed to mean was the disagreement about Iraq between the US Bush administration and most governments of the world as represented in the UN. And yes, UNSG Kofi Annan wasn´t thrilled as well, but in practice, he didn´t have a say in the UNSC decisions.

And again, after 9-11, both the UN - as represented by Annan - and practically all member nations were fully behind the USA.

Your ill will against the UN is only surpassed by your ignorance about the UN, what it is, what it stands for and what actually happened with its organs.

It is a sad confirmation of my reply 2 above.  Sad
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:53 am

That too...

It's a corrupt, bloated, toothless, expensive waste of time.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
StowAway
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:48 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:54 am

Well, the Oil For Food scandal isn't helping the UN's case much. You probably expected that to come up, and probably have heard plenty on it. So I won't mess around with explaining it further.

I simply think that the UN has a jaded view on the way the world is now. Not to get back to the Iraq War, but I disagreed with the UN's final stance.

The primary purpose of the UN is:
The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends.

That sounds well and good, but I think that they have overstepped the bounds a little. Example: Publicly calling the US stingy regarding our aid in the disaster. Where does that fall into place within the set purpose? The UN should not be a central government, but just a place for communications between countries.

I am curious. (This is not a setup, I really don't know the answer.) We, as well as other nations, are currently in talks with North Korea regarding their nuclear program. Is the UN helping with this?

A monkey's ass always talks crap.
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:54 am

Lets face it. Their Oil-For-Arms money scandal makes them the largest terrorist supporting organization in the world, and the U.S should not be harboring terrorism or any terrorism financing organizations.
 
Gman94
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:55 am

That would require the UN to actually *do* something wouldn't it? It's precisely their complete inaction in the Sudan, the Congo, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, etc, etc, combined with their absolutely toothless decrees that make me questions it's use. Has the UN ever followed through on any threat it's made?

Or maybe it's the silly security council veto's which stop the UN doing anything really constructive for example sanctions against Israel for their treatment of the Palestinians.

The blame for the UN's lack of strong action where it's needed lies at the feet of the member nations and their own selfish reasons not to act for the greater good.
British Airways - The Way To Fly
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:56 am

Finally... Progress on the topic at least...

StowAway: Well, the Oil For Food scandal isn't helping the UN's case much. You probably expected that to come up, and probably have heard plenty on it. So I won't mess around with explaining it further.

I simply think that the UN has a jaded view on the way the world is now. Not to get back to the Iraq War, but I disagreed with the UN's final stance.


"The UN" is not a separate governing body. It is a forum of its members.

Its actual decision (and much of the more controversial groundwork) is politically carried or carried out by its member nations (which is also largely true for the oil for food program).


StowAway: The primary purpose of the UN is:
The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends.


Sure. But the UN never takes the necessary decisions by itself. It´s always the member nations who make those decisions, not Secretary General Annan.


StowAway: That sounds well and good, but I think that they have overstepped the bounds a little. Example: Publicly calling the US stingy regarding our aid in the disaster. Where does that fall into place within the set purpose?

The UN official reminded all western nations they´re rather "stingy" despite their considerable wealth. And he even referred to those nations as "we". Please look at the actual quotes instead of a few out-of-context sound bytes.


StowAway: The UN should not be a central government, but just a place for communications between countries.

So you´d be happier if all the coordinating and aid organisations stopped working immediately?

[Edited 2004-12-31 03:06:33]
 
bravo7e7
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 1:43 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 10:58 am

This is a bias source, but please just read a little bit of it.
http://www.unisevil.com/temp213.htm
 
StowAway
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:48 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:00 am

Klaus, I think this was meant to be an intelligent, rational conversation, and not a place for your preset biased rantings.

It was only the totally unrelated (and unjustified) Iraq invasion where the Bush administration met resistance (which was justified as we all know by now).

That says it all right there.....

A monkey's ass always talks crap.
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:03 am

Holy cow... I didn't know I'd spark this!  Sad
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

StowAway

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:10 am

StowAway: Klaus, I think this was meant to be an intelligent, rational conversation, and not a place for your preset biased rantings.

The factually false rants of Bravo7e7 above sadly necessitated a response.


Klaus: It was only the totally unrelated (and unjustified) Iraq invasion where the Bush administration met resistance (which was justified as we all know by now).

StowAway: That says it all right there.....

It´s verifiably correct in every single point. Whether you´re happy with that or not. Sorry for being blunt.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:12 am

The UN is only as good as its members. Considering the security council consists of the US, UK, China, Russia and France permanently, and is the UN's most powerful body, the US has to take a lot of the blame if people critisise the UN.

I simply think that the UN has a jaded view on the way the world is now. Not to get back to the Iraq War, but I disagreed with the UN's final stance.

The UN is merely made up of nations, of which the US is the most powerful. If you disagree with it, you disagree with the world.

That sounds well and good, but I think that they have overstepped the bounds a little. Example: Publicly calling the US stingy regarding our aid in the disaster. Where does that fall into place within the set purpose? The UN should not be a central government, but just a place for communications between countries.

The UN never said that, a UN official said the UN and the rest of the Western world were stingy with aid.

If the US hates the UN so much, leave. There is nothing stopping you.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

Bravo7e7

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:13 am

Bravo7e7: This is a bias source, but please just read a little bit of it.

That is a joke, right? Big grin
You can´t seriously pretend to take that kind of factually unsupported, twisted paranoia for real, can you?  Nuts

It explains a few things, however.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:13 am

I am curious. (This is not a setup, I really don't know the answer.) We, as well as other nations, are currently in talks with North Korea regarding their nuclear program. Is the UN helping with this?

Nearly all the talks with North Korea and Iran have been initiated and mediated by the UN.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:14 am

"It was only the totally unrelated (and unjustified) Iraq invasion where the Bush administration met resistance (which was justified as we all know by now)."

Not to turn this into anything about the Iraq War but here's the difference:

The US told Saddam he has 48 hours to fess up or clear out because we'll kick his a$$. And after 48 hours we beat the sh!t out of him, as promised.

The UN, by contrast, has created umpteen resolutions in a dozen years eventually stating something to the effect of "the UN does not like what you're doing, please stop or else we'll have to take some sort of action" which of course they never intended to take.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:16 am

The US told Saddam he has 48 hours to fess up or clear out because we'll kick his a$$. And after 48 hours we beat the sh!t out of him, as promised.

The UN, by contrast, has created umpteen resolutions in a dozen years eventually stating something to the effect of "the UN does not like what you're doing, please stop or else we'll have to take some sort of action" which of course they never intended to take.


Ultimately, what was the right course of action to take? Was Saddam a threat to the US?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

MaverickM11

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:20 am

MaverickM11: Not to turn this into anything about the Iraq War but here's the difference:

We´ve gone over this enough times already, don´t you think?

In this particular discussion, Bravo7e7 claimed that "the UN" hadn´t supported the US after 9-11 which is completely and verifiably false.

Not recognizing "little things" as subtle as that got you where you are now.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:20 am

"Ultimately, what was the right course of action to take? Was Saddam a threat to the US?"

Doesn't matter. Find a different thread if you want to answer that. The same question could be asked of the umpteen useless threats to the Sudanese government. Or what about Rwanda? What did the UN do there? *crickets chirping*.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:25 am

Doesn't matter. Find a different thread if you want to answer that.

It clearly does matter. The UN wanted to send in weapons inspectors again, as the weapons inspectors didn't know whether he had WMD. He didn't.

The US went to war on the single premise that he had WMD, which he didn't.

In hindsight, the UN's proposed course of action was the best one to take. Even if you take the whole 'war on terror' idea into play, the UN's idea was better - just how many more terrorists, and terror attacks against Americans, has the war on Iraq created?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:27 am

"It clearly does matter. The UN wanted to send in weapons inspectors again, as the weapons inspectors didn't know whether he had WMD"

OMG stop. I should have never brought up Iraq. This is not about Iraq. Forget I ever said Iraq.

Replace Iraq with Sudan and tell me all the wonderful things the UN is doing to prevent atrocities in Darfur?

What about all the times that the UN said it was going to take action against any rogue state, anywhere, and actually followed through on consequences? Can you even list one?
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
Springbok747
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:29 am

The same question could be asked of the umpteen useless threats to the Sudanese government. Or what about Rwanda? What did the UN do there?

Forget Rwanda...look at our neighbor..Zimbabwe. It is in a bloody mess, and what the hell is the UN doing? People have been literally thrown out of their farms and homes, and been invaded by "war veterans". WTF?! What f*cking war veterans..I don't know. They don't have basic necessities like fuel, water or food. That place is worse than Hell right now. And..what the f*ck is the UN doing...nothing.
אני תומך בישראל
 
StowAway
Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 10:48 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:29 am

777236ER,
Nearly all the talks with North Korea and Iran have been initiated and mediated by the UN.

Proof please, not just your word.... I did a little research, and found some articles relating to my question.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,142154,00.html Is the UN anywhere in there? What about here? http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/02/24/nkorea.talks/index.html

Ultimately, what was the right course of action to take? Was Saddam a threat to the US?

That is opening up for a flame war. It is a little tired.....
A monkey's ass always talks crap.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

MaverickM11

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:31 am

MaverickM11: Doesn't matter. Find a different thread if you want to answer that. The same question could be asked of the umpteen useless threats to the Sudanese government. Or what about Rwanda? What did the UN do there? *crickets chirping*.

Futilely asking its member nations for troops, perhaps? Too bad their own unmarked black helicopters were in the shop that day.  Nuts

And the crickets are still chirping on with regard to generous help in the Sudan case... (Although in that case much of the blame seems to lie with the russian and chinese reluctance to allow an UNSC resolution against the Sudanese government)


The point is that people who are too lazy for bothering with the complexity of our world seem to take the easy way out in simply tacking their xenophobic damnation of the rest of the world on the UN as an universal bogeyman and scapegoat.

It´s bad enough that civilian people fall for this nonsense, but at least national governments should know better than that.

Should.  Sad
 
Gman94
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:32 am

You Yanks need to get a grip on reality, the reason the UN fails to take decisive action is the fault of the member nations including the US. The way you guys talk it's as if the UN is running some sort of conspiracy against America, but then as the US is a member your running a conspiracy against yourself.  Nuts
British Airways - The Way To Fly
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15214
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:33 am

"Forget Rwanda...look at our neighbor..Zimbabwe. It is in a bloody mess, and what the hell is the UN doing? People have been literally thrown out of their farms and homes, and been invaded by "war veterans". WTF?! What f*cking war veterans..I don't know. They don't have basic necessities like fuel, water or food. That place is worse than Hell right now. And..what the f*ck is the UN doing...nothing."

Exactly! At least it's worked out real well for Mocamibque and Malawi.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:33 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/2604437.stm

Check out just how much the IAEA and UN had to contribute. All the six nations talks were mediated by the UN.

That is opening up for a flame war. It is a little tired.....

No, it's not. People ask what good the UN is - well it was right with Iraq.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:36 am

"Forget Rwanda...look at our neighbor..Zimbabwe. It is in a bloody mess, and what the hell is the UN doing? People have been literally thrown out of their farms and homes, and been invaded by "war veterans". WTF?! What f*cking war veterans..I don't know. They don't have basic necessities like fuel, water or food. That place is worse than Hell right now. And..what the f*ck is the UN doing...nothing."

Bear in mind many North Korean's don't have fuel, water or food either - if any member chaired a motion to send in supplies do you really think the US wouldn't veto it? Lest we remind you the US vetos resolutions more than any other member state. Just what is the US doing about Zimbabwe? I thought you got rid of dictators?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Springbok747
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:46 am

I thought you got rid of dictators?

Well, we haven't. And why should the US do anything? The US is just one country..its not the UN. And, what is the damn purpose of the UN anyway?

The so-called UN charter says:

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
-to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

-to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

-to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

-to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Blah..blah blah

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person

HA..what a bloody joke. Come to Zim and see how fundemental human rights are being "upheld".

Its just bullshit. The whole damn UN is full of bullshit.
אני תומך בישראל
 
Gman94
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:56 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:53 am

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
-to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

-to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

-to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

-to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Blah..blah blah

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person

HA..what a bloody joke. Come to Zim and see how fundemental human rights are being "upheld".

Its just bullshit. The whole damn UN is full of bullshit.


Unfortunately it's the member nations who have forgotten the ideals that the UN was set up for.

I'll try this one last time as you guys really aren't understanding how the UN works:

IT'S THE SELF SERVING MEMBER NATIONS THAT HANDCUFF THE UN, OF WHICH THE US IS ONE.
British Airways - The Way To Fly
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:55 am

Well, we haven't. And why should the US do anything? The US is just one country..its not the UN. And, what is the damn purpose of the UN anyway?


"It's", son, "it's".

So wait, if the US doesn't get rid of dictatores, just WHY did you invade Iraq?

-to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

-to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

-to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

-to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

[Your comment]Blah..blah blah

Do you not agree with those ideas? Do you not think there should be someone who tries up uphold those ideas?

HA..what a bloody joke. Come to Zim and see how fundemental human rights are being "upheld".

Its just bullshit. The whole damn UN is full of bullshit.


The UN is only as good as its members, and the US is a large participant. I don't think someone from/live in South Africa can really take any form of moral high ground.

By the way, I hope you understand the spirit with which that Eric Cartman quote was meant?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Springbok747
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:01 pm

I don't think someone from/live in South Africa can really take any form of moral high ground.

What does that mean 777236ER? Really, I'm confused.

By the way, I hope you understand the spirit with which that Eric Cartman quote was meant?

Huh?

Do you not agree with those ideas? Do you not think there should be someone who tries up uphold those ideas?

Yes, I agree with those ideas. It's (correct spelling this time..LOL!) ok to have ideas on paper...but what's the point if they are not put into action?
Yes, I think there should be someone (the UN), who tries to uphold these ideas, but what the hell are they (the UN) doing? They are no better than our "great" President and his quiet diplomacy about Zimbabwe.



אני תומך בישראל
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:04 pm

Reasons the UN is good:

CEB,
CTBTO,
CEB,
ECA,
ECE,
ECLAC,
ESCAP,
ESCAW,
FAO,
UNCTAD-UNDP,
HLCM,
HLCP,
IACSD,
IANWGE,
IAPSO,
IAWG,
IAEA,
IBRD,
IBE,
ICGEB,
ICS,
ICSID,
ICTP,
ICAO (!)
ICSC,
ICC,
ICJ,
ICTY,
ICTR,
IDA,
IFC,
IFAD,
IIEP,
INIA,
ILO,
IMO,
IMF,
INSTRAW,
ISA,
ISDR,
ITU,
ITC,
ITC/ILO,
JIU,
JIAMCATT,
UNAIDS,
MIGA,
NGLS,
OCHA,
OOSA,
OPCW,
OCHA,
SCN,
UNICEF,
UNCITRAL,
UNCSD,
UNCG,
UNCC,
UNCTAD,
UNCCD,
UNDCP,
UNIFEM,
UNDG,
UNDP,
UNESCO,
UNEP,
UNFCCC,
UNFIP,
UNGIWG,
OHCHR,
UNHCR,
UN-HABITAT,
UNIDO,
UNICT TF,
UNIDIR,
UNITAR,
UNIS,
UNICRI,
UNJSPF
UNODC,
UNOPS,
UNFPA,
UNPA,
UNRWA,
UNRISD,
RCNet,
UNSSC,
UNU,
UNV,
UPU,
UPEACE,
WFP,
WHO,
WIPO,
WMO,
WTO.

These are the organisations that members pay for, and these are the organisations the keep the world running.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
5NEOO
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:16 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:04 pm

Yes, I think there should be someone (the UN), who tries to uphold these ideas, but what the hell are they (the UN) doing? They are no better than our "great" President and his quiet diplomacy about Zimbabwe.

Let me guess, you are definitely not a Black South African are you?
Admit it, you could care less about the continent Africa!
 
Springbok747
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:06 pm

Let me guess, you are definitely not a Black South African are you?

No, but what does that have to do with this discussion anyway?!
אני תומך בישראל
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:09 pm

I don't think someone from/live in South Africa can really take any form of moral high ground.

What does that mean 777236ER? Really, I'm confused.

It means that not so long ago, South Africa was stuck in the midst of Middle Age racism.

By the way, I hope you understand the spirit with which that Eric Cartman quote was meant?

Huh?


Jesus Christ, watch it a bit closer, open your mind a bit and if that fails, check up on the creators.

Yes, I agree with those ideas. It's (correct spelling this time..LOL!) ok to have ideas on paper...but what's the point if they are not put into action?

But they are, every single day of every single year by the organisations I have listed. If it wasn't for the UN, we'd be blown up (Cuban missile crisis), crashing into mountains (ICAO), dying of disease (WHO, UNAIDS), currency exchange would be meaningless (WTO), multinational companies wouldn't exist (WTO), women and minorities would still be discriminated against in vast parts of the world (UNIFEM). Every single organisation I posted above has done something very meaningful.

Yes, I think there should be someone (the UN), who tries to uphold these ideas, but what the hell are they (the UN) doing? They are no better than our "great" President and his quiet diplomacy about Zimbabwe.

Not so nice now the shoe is on the other foot, eh? The UN is only as good as its member states, of which the US is a major constituant. How many times must it be repeated?
Your bone's got a little machine
 
5NEOO
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:16 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:15 pm

I for one am happy the UN exists. Organisations like UNICEF (UN Children's Fund), UNESCO (UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation), UNDP (UN Development Programme), and WHO (World Health Organisation) have done a lot over the past decades to improve the quality of life for citizens of impoverished nations.
Admit it, you could care less about the continent Africa!
 
5NEOO
Posts: 205
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:16 am

RE: Question For Anti-UN People

Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:18 pm

No, but what does that have to do with this discussion anyway?!

Just asking a simple question my man.
Admit it, you could care less about the continent Africa!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: coolian2, jpetekyxmd80, N867DA, pvjin and 36 guests