It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: MrSpad
I will never get the afraid of the UN thing. Peacekeeping operations are always undermanned and underfunded. Nobody ever wants to send people. They never armed well enough and normally never fight unless attacked. And while technically under the UN nobody follows UN orders without checking with their own chain of command first. Which is why the are slow to react to anything. Of course they are peace keepers not a military force, they are not suppose to show up unless peace has been agreed to so they are more like hall monitors that will not even act if something goes down in front of them beyond sending in a report. You try working with them sometime and you find the UN taking over for the nonsense it is.
originally posted by: MrSpad
originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: MrSpad
Yep.
They stand there and allow all sorts of things to occur.
I realize they aren't there to enforce the law...but supposedly, they are there to peacekeep, not stand around with their fingers up their...
As you may surmise, I have little to no use for the UN. A grandiose, wonderful notion that failed nearly from the get go.
Well the UN does some somethings great. Getting aid out and fighting hunger, vaccinations, allowing diplomatic solutions, giving small nations a voice, they have done a much better job than the US in fighting for women s rights, through oral rehydration therapy, clear water and sanitation and other health and nutrition practices the UN has reduced child mortality rates from 1 in 10 to 1 in 18, they wiped out polio, and dealing with epidemics. The UN has a lot of problems when comes to peace keeping and peace enforcement but, they do a tremendous amount of good as well. Having worked with their peace keepers I rightfuly bash them but, at the same time I have seen the good the UN has done outside of the peace keeping arena. Which is why more and more the UN is not being asked to do the peacekeeping and instead regional groups are. Works much better that way.
originally posted by: kellynap43
originally posted by: MrSpad
originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: MrSpad
Yep.
They stand there and allow all sorts of things to occur.
I realize they aren't there to enforce the law...but supposedly, they are there to peacekeep, not stand around with their fingers up their...
As you may surmise, I have little to no use for the UN. A grandiose, wonderful notion that failed nearly from the get go.
Well the UN does some somethings great. Getting aid out and fighting hunger, vaccinations, allowing diplomatic solutions, giving small nations a voice, they have done a much better job than the US in fighting for women s rights, through oral rehydration therapy, clear water and sanitation and other health and nutrition practices the UN has reduced child mortality rates from 1 in 10 to 1 in 18, they wiped out polio, and dealing with epidemics. The UN has a lot of problems when comes to peace keeping and peace enforcement but, they do a tremendous amount of good as well. Having worked with their peace keepers I rightfuly bash them but, at the same time I have seen the good the UN has done outside of the peace keeping arena. Which is why more and more the UN is not being asked to do the peacekeeping and instead regional groups are. Works much better that way.
The United States is the UN. We fund the majority of it. Just to be clear.
cnsnews.com...
The Establishment Hierarchy (EH) holds all the cards, but there is a growing awareness, even within their mind-kontrolled ranks, of their illegitimacy, coupled with a loss of loyalty at every level. The EH knows this, and that is why they are making arrangements to bring in NATO and UN troops for support, because they no longer believe the American Military, the American National Guards or the American police will stay loyal to them when the SHTF.
originally posted by: tweetie
a reply to: kellynap43
I happened to read something last night, an article written by Preston James who posts at the, "Veterans Today," website.
While the article is not about U.N. vehicles being seen in the U.S., Preston made a comment at the end of his last article as of yesterday under the Conclusion part which I'm going to include here, just in case, and for possible future reference. I don't have the contacts he does but things can seemingly change in a blasted second on this world though they may have been building behind the scenes beforehand, in secret.
The Establishment Hierarchy (EH) holds all the cards, but there is a growing awareness, even within their mind-kontrolled ranks, of their illegitimacy, coupled with a loss of loyalty at every level. The EH knows this, and that is why they are making arrangements to bring in NATO and UN troops for support, because they no longer believe the American Military, the American National Guards or the American police will stay loyal to them when the SHTF.
Here's the link to the article though it's mostly off topic to this thread but I'll include it for point of reference.
I'm not posting this to alarm anyone, nor can I say if it will happen, but just for the record.
originally posted by: hellobruce
originally posted by: tommyjo
Hopefully one of the companies will release a statement?
Why would they do that? Nothing strange is going on, just a few people who see a conspiracy in everything!
originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: iTruthSeeker
I guess it is good though it is not M1 Abrams or APCs , That would be concerning to say the least.