Kay
Topic Author
Posts: 1797
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 3:41 pm

Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:25 am

Today I had the pleasure to hear Ban Ki-Moon speak out his introductory conference in Vienna, which he did before Geneva (slightly angering them).

And I have the pleasure to say that I was impressed. Much less presence then Kofi Annan, some English mistakes, but much more substance and a substance that is spot-on. Without making an effort, he clearly has a lot to say and the few points he mentioned, I agree with. It's only an impression of course.

Regardless of the UN's lack of real influence in today's world, I do think that the new SG will make the most of it.

Kay
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 12:54 am

Well, let's hope he cleans up that cesspool of louts and slurpers from the public trough in New York and do something about Darfur besides lots of handwringing. And clean up crap like the Oil For Graft program, no thanks to the AWB.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
Klaus
Posts: 20600
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:35 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 1):
Well, let's hope he cleans up that cesspool of louts and slurpers from the public trough in New York and do something about Darfur besides lots of handwringing. And clean up crap like the Oil For Graft program, no thanks to the AWB.

All of that depends a lot more on the willingness of the member nations who actually control the UN than the UNSG who has very little actual power (by design). He can't achieve much if he continues to be blocked by voting members of the Security Council (as in Darfur) or by the members of the oversight comittees.

It's sad to see those misconceptions are still around and keep being repeated.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:39 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 1):
Well, let's hope he cleans up that cesspool of louts and slurpers from the public trough in New York and do something about Darfur besides lots of handwringing. And clean up crap like the Oil For Graft program, no thanks to the AWB.

 checkmark 

Quoting Klaus (Reply 2):
It's sad to see those misconceptions are still around and keep being repeated.

Oil for Graft wasn't any misconception. Just ask Kofi Anna's boy about that.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
Klaus
Posts: 20600
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:04 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3):
Oil for Graft wasn't any misconception.

No, the misconception is that it was somehow magically the fault of the UNSG instead of the screwed-up oversight comittee and even open interference by certain members.

Some people are so hell-bent on blaming everything on the evil, evil UN that they go so far as to completely and totally exonerating the actual power players who are really determining the fate and the course of the UN.

It's getting old. The UN needs to be improved and fixed on many levels including the administrative one, but yelling at scapegoats and protecting the real saboteurs at the same time certainly won't help.
 
miamiair
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:42 pm

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:08 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):

Sorry, you can't blame this on the US. The US is an insignificant voice that has been muffled by the SC. You can't have it both ways.
Molon Labe - Proud member of SMASH
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:10 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 4):
Some people are so hell-bent on blaming everything on the evil, evil UN that they go so far as to completely and totally exonerating the actual power players who are really determining the fate and the course of the UN.

Well, you do more or less have a point. How can one constantly blame the UN for anything - they don't do squat. A resolution here, a resolution there. Big deal. Antiquated and outmoded. Ineffective. We've seen how well they took care of Darfur . . . ohh, wait - the US was supposed to that too huh. . . .

The UN needs an enema from the ground up.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
Klaus
Posts: 20600
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:24 am

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 5):
Sorry, you can't blame this on the US. The US is an insignificant voice that has been muffled by the SC. You can't have it both ways.

"Muffled!? I wish! Where were you the past four years?

There has been US collusion with iraqi oil smuggling in at least one case where smuggling tankers were explicitly let through by the US fleet and there has been a lack of oversight by the UN comittee in which the USA were one of several who slept at the wheel.

Other than that, the "oil for food" irregularities never were as significant as the politically motivated witch hunt started by the US republicans made it out to be - they had a dire need to smear the UN by any means possible, but in actual fact it's not more than a minor footnote relative to what we've seen happen since 2003.

The UN has been spectacularly vindicated by and despite of the US invasion of Iraq, while clearly the opposite had been intended.

It is high time to stop the obstruction on every level and to help getting the UN up to speed so the vast range of international problems can finally be tackled constructively instead of the futile sledgehammer approach of the past.

Ban Ki-Moon deserves to be challenged, but also to be supported by the broadest possible coalition of member nations so we can finally solve more problems than we're creating.
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:33 am

Quoting Klaus (Reply 7):
There has been US collusion with iraqi oil smuggling in at least one case where smuggling tankers were explicitly let through by the US fleet and there has been a lack of oversight by the UN comittee in which the USA were one of several who slept at the wheel.

Source?

Quoting Klaus (Reply 7):
Other than that, the "oil for food" irregularities never were as significant as the politically motivated witch hunt started by the US republicans made it out to be

Corruption is corruption.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 7):
The UN has been spectacularly vindicated by and despite of the US invasion of Iraq

Don't quit your day job, you'll never make it as a stand-up comedian.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 7):
It is high time to stop the obstruction on every level and to help getting the UN up to speed so the vast range of international problems can finally be tackled constructively instead of the futile sledgehammer approach of the past.

The only way the UN can help solve the vast range of international problems is by being dissolved. It IS the problem.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 7):
Ban Ki-Moon deserves to be challenged, but also to be supported by the broadest possible coalition of member nations so we can finally solve more problems than we're creating.

The UN HAS never, and WILL never solve more problems than it creates.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20600
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:39 am

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 6):
Well, you do more or less have a point. How can one constantly blame the UN for anything - they don't do squat. A resolution here, a resolution there. Big deal. Antiquated and outmoded. Ineffective. We've seen how well they took care of Darfur . . . ohh, wait - the US was supposed to that too huh. . . .

Sigh. Please read up on what the UN really is!

The UN is basically equivalent to the building and the staff of your american Congress, with the UN member governments being equivalent to the actual voting delegates.

What you and many other americans are doing is basically blaming the voting decisions made on the floor on the guys who are ordering new paper, cleaning the halls and ceremonially representing the administrative side of the whole organisation, without ever being involved in the actual decisions.

You'd be completely embarrassed (and rightly so) if you were caught making these kinds of accusations to the administrative staff of your own parliament, so why do you keep repeating that same mistake here over and over and over again?
 
Klaus
Posts: 20600
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:10 am

Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
Source?

Let's start here, for instance:

Markup: Subcommittee Report of "The Oil-for-Food Program: The Systematic Failure of the United Nations"

Mr. Delahunt's contribution:

Quote:
I also want to make clear that I agree with the report's conclusion that there were serious problems with the Oil-for-Food Program, and there is undoubtedly a critical need to reform the UN so that it can best meet the challenges it faces. But I cannot support the report. That is because it has a fundamental flaw.



Quote:
It does not accurately reflect how the United Nations functions. It does not emphasize the reality that it is the member states, not the Secretariat, that possess the real power and ultimate responsibility at the United Nations.

He must actually have read the UN charta and understood it, too!  faint 

Quote:
I, and others on our side, have consistently raised the issue of the Security Council's 661 Committee. The United States was a member of that Committee, which was supposed to oversee both the Oil-for-Food Program and the sanctions regime. We need to determine how and why the United States made its decisions on that Committee. That would contribute to what we know about the failures of the program or violations of the sanctions regime, and it would provide us an opportunity to learn from our mistakes in case we need to craft any future sanctions regime. Unfortunately, we did no such oversight.



Quote:
There are also questions about the possible role of the United States in the so-called ''Khor al-Amaya Incident.'' Just before our invasion of Iraq, seven tankers smuggled oil out of Iraq under the nose of the United States-led fleet in the Persian Gulf that was supposed to stop exactly this kind of smuggling. There are serious allegations that the United States did not just look the other way but may have actually assisted the smugglers. If so, we need an explanation. The American people deserve it.



Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
Corruption is corruption.

Absolutely - but as long as smoke grenades are thrown instead of impartial investigations, there is little hope of improvement. The ultimate responsibility was at the UNSC and the oversight comittee, both manned by the member nations, not by UN officials!

UN officials were apparently involved, but the responsible oversight failed completely and unnecessarily. But of course that makes the UN as an administrative organisation the only and exclusive culprit.  crazy 

Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
Don't quit your day job, you'll never make it as a stand-up comedian.

The UN inspectors were completely vindicated by the US investigators after the invasion.

The UN approach of completing the inspections instead of invading about the WMD claims was completely vindicated.

The US invasion under exclusion of international institutions has turned out to be a costly political failure with worldwide repercussions and collateral damage on an unprecedented scale.

I could go on. (And probably will.)

Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
The only way the UN can help solve the vast range of international problems is by being dissolved. It IS the problem.

Stop being wrong about absolutely everything where you differ from the majority UN position and you might regain a bit of credibility here. As things stand, you don't have any.

Quoting Queso (Reply 8):
The UN HAS never, and WILL never solve more problems than it creates.

Contrary to the USA, right?  innocent   silly   hypnotized 

The UN is the only democratic institution on a worldwide scale. Unfortunately as messy and often frustrating as it is to share a vote with other people one might not even like, every single alternative is still worse. So instead of destroying this democratic institution, you might just as well help making it work properly.

The alternatives are not appealing.
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Ban Ki-Moon

Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:16 am

Oh great, another UN bash.  sarcastic 

As for the Darfur disaster, why don't you UN haters aim your tirades at China that has vetoed e.g. sanctions against Sudan out of economic interests? The UN is a paper tiger only if its members make it one, which unfortunately seems to be the norm these days. The current US admin plays just as large of a role in that as e.g. China.

The failings of the Oil for Food Programme are an entirely different animal - very little to do with the self-paralysing parts of the setup of the UN and a lot to do with their effects.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: drew777, Jetsgo and 10 guests