Reform the United Nations

Originally posted by Bout Time
....are also staunch Bush War proponents? All?
Go figure! Such a co---inky---dink!

How aboutr we stop subsidizing the 3rd largest weapons seller in the world( Israel) and pay the UN?

And yes Voice of Doom.....we should bomb Alabama! That or give'em to Vincente Fox as a booby prize or something!

Yeah, that makes sense, stop supporting a nation who is much like us in a representative, democratic government, and support an organization that wants our money and military but not our input.
How utterly pathetic that you would suggest that.

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
I agree! Those who spend the "most" money should obviously get the "most" in return. Thats how it works here in America...and if its good enough for us its good enough for the rest of the world.
Why have a social institution based on reason and international law that would try to look at all sides of an issue and legitimate with an ounce of fairness??? It justs gets in the way.
I believe that if the UN isn't going to do as its told by a "member" nation than the whole system is f**cked and needs to be replaced at once.
This is good policy in other areas of the world as well. Take California for example. Since they are one of the highest "financial" contributors to the federal tax-sluch pile, they should also be given unilateral ability to push their agenda onto the rest of the country. It just makes sense. And if say, Alabama, didn't want to impose those high gasoline taxes, high polution standards and pro-marijuana policies, California could have the right to "disband the union" or even pre-emtively strike the "bass-ackward r*dnecks" living in Alabama.
But what about the differences in cultures, you might ask??? What about respecting Alabama's soverign rights or even the southeast coalition of SC, GA, AL and FLA??? Well we all know their illiterate religious fanatics who want to turn the country into a judeo-christian theocracy...so the kind of have it comin...


Money, Money Money.....dont let it change ya!

I'm sure you think you are quite the pundit, but I assure you, your ignorance is outdone only by your stupidity. Your analogy merely proves that.
As far as the U.N. telling anyone to do something, what, do you thin kit has already become the ultimate authority? By whose basis of morality? Syria's? Maybe your buddy's over in North Korea? Putin's?
Clue you in on something, the U.N. doesn't do what it was designed to do, all it does is try and be an instrument by which the non-producers take from the producers, and the tyrants try and justify themselves internationally. A body of law, you say? You are delusional. Their "law" is founded on thin air. That, I feel quite confident, means nothing to you and BT, to others it means alot.

And if you're gonna bomb anything, bomb California and the rest of the freak states. We here in Alabama still believe in the concept of states' rights and hope for its return, unlike the liberal freaks who want to keep such rights away and want to regulate everything for everybody.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
And if you're gonna bomb anything, bomb California and the rest of the freak states. We here in Alabama still believe in the concept of states' rights and hope for its return, unlike the liberal freaks who want to keep such rights away and want to regulate everything for everybody.

Here Here ! Agreed.

LOL Liberals.

You can always catch them in the net of logic.

I have thought a lot about the UN in the past year or so.

There is only two choices, get out of it and risk the whole world ganging up on you (which is what the OWO globalists are trying to do to the US now - with help internally from the ever grateful socialists - you know those people that get a government cheque every month and live with their hand in your pocket), or the required reform of this hill of stinking shyte.

Time for the first world democratic and capitalistic nations to gain more control. Then it may be expedient to pay dues as required.

Keep adding that fuel to the fire Cons.... Bomb the freak states huh? Blue vs Red? Next American civil war...revving up.

Frankly a civil war is not such a bad thing after all, it can clean up a lot of mess and get people back on track.

The main this is that the entire country is not destroyed as a result of it.

Originally posted by THENEO
Frankly a civil war is not such a bad thing after all, it can clean up a lot of mess and get people back on track.

The main this is that the entire country is not destroyed as a result of it.

At this point I'm going to agree with you.

Few snippets from the Faux News commentary...


"... bureaucracy, one that�s often cloaked in secrecy. Its more than 56,000 employees are largely shielded from public scrutiny, which is one reason the Bush administration should also call for a thorough external audit of the United Nations (which doesn�t even publish an annual report).

Secrecy? www.unpan.org...

56,000? That number must include the employees of member and non-member states, not the U.N. itself.

External audit? How about we audit the latest defense supplemental, then pick on the U.N.

"With the latest polls showing that 60 percent of Americans believe the United Nations is doing a �poor job,� such efforts are likely to prove popular with the public."

It doesn't help that some outfit in LaVerkin, Utah is paying for billboards (all owned by Clear Channel) that say "Fight Terrorism. Get U.S. out of U.N."

"Indeed, future levels of U.S. funding for the U.N. general fund should be linked directly to the pace of U.N. reform."

Funding levels should be based on GDP.

"The State Department is advancing another key reform that Capitol Hill lawmakers should strongly support -- a democracy caucus within the United Nations"

Can we ask them to monitor the 2004 election and anti-war protests?

"Libya�s chairmanship of the commission, and its appeasement of brutal dictatorships in Africa, Asia and the Middle East, has seriously undermined the U.N.�s reputation. Under Libya�s leadership, the UNCHR has become an absurdity."

Appeasement of brutal distatorships? Uh...correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't all the brutal dictatorships in power prior to Libya's chairmanship? Guantanamo Bay and Bush's War on Terror is the only absudrdity that is recent.

"It will continue to decline as a force on the world stage and go the way of the League of Nations (search) unless it�s radically reformed and restructured."

The U.N. will continue to decline as long as Bush is set on hegemony.

"The world body can and should play an important role in mediating international disputes, advancing human rights, and countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Let�s give it the help it needs to do so."

Lets start by calling Fox News what it really is. Faux News.

I could continue on a nice 1000 word essay describing the benefits of the U.N. and the dangers of unmanaged global commons, but why? You people have already made up your mind. While I acknowledge that it is isn't perfect, this the last agency I'd be trying to straighten out. Why not take a hard look at the UNHSP folks? No, Bush doesn't want America to know that the U.N. actually does something good for the world.

To further clarify, the agencies are not redundant. DPI handles NGO correspondence and information dissemination, whereas the UNIC is a network of Information Centres to educate member state populations. So you say, why do we need to be educated? Do you know what UNICEF, UNESCO or WFP does? These secretive organizations are evil. If you call it propaganda then you have to describe the Faux commentary in the same manner.

"The United Nations Information Centre in Washington, DC is a public resource facility for the dissemination of current data about United Nations activities and a reference library of United Nations documentation....promotes an informed understanding of the work and purposes of the United Nations among the citizens of the United States; "

Take a look yourself..not the same thing..

www.unicwash.org...
www.undpi.org...
www.un.org...

# FOX NEWS

ATS needs to get a guide going on whats considered "reliable" and "ATS Approved" news, sites, sources, etc........eh?


Found these for those left-wing liberals:
"A WORLD EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY THE UNITED NATIONS"
Link:
www.getusout.org...

"The real battle ahead"
Link:
www.worldnetdaily.com...

Reform......try seriously massive overhaul with options to terminate!


regards
seekerof

[Edited on 24-11-2003 by Seekerof]

I think the UN who hate what US is doing right now should be moved to some other place out of US!

Maybe Iraq if they love to make peace so much!

I really think UN is just waste of money.

Why spend money on UN when it doesnt do # exept just sit on its ass and tells everyone what to do.

The world would of been a completely different place without the UN.
We only really have one glimpse of what it would of been like.
Initially there were only four permanent members of the security council with a veto.US,USSR,UK,and France.Russia suggested that China should also have a veto as it was an emerging power the others disagreed so the USSR withdrew from the UN leaving only the western powers in control.They quickly passed a UN resolution and got themselves involved in the Korean War which had UN backing.
People often forget that the Korean War almost brought us the World War 3.The UN forces,led by the USA, virtually took the whole Korean Penisula before some bright spark(against Pesidential orders)decided to attack China.Chinese forces came streaming into Korea and the Korean Penisular was divided as it is now.

When things had calmed down China was granted a permanent place on the Security Council and the USSR returned.

The UN's purpose has been to stop Nuclear powers from acting in a way that adversly effect the vital national interests of other Nuclear powers.Therefore avoiding Nuclear Conflict.
It is the USA that have used their veto the most and therefore had the greatest value from membership.

StarWars does not exist as yet and therefore the Nuclear danger is still there.Throwing away the UN before Starwars is dangerous to everyone.

The world needs the UN.
It is the ONLY body of international law respected by all nations. It is the ONLY means of a voice for hundreds of smaller countries.

The US needs the UN too. To say that it could survive without it is silly. The UN gives authority to US actions. Without that backing, the US would find it almost impossible to operate abroad, both financially and militarily.
The UN has probably saved man from destroying himself a dozen times over. To pull out because of some childish whim and disinformation campaign would hurt the US beyond comprehension.

The way the rest of the world sees the UN is as a check on US globalism. If the US were to pull out, it would be perceived as thumbing it's nose at the whole world community. It would lose every single friend that it has.

It's also churlish to think or claim that the US doesn't benefit from the UN. It's position on the security council means that it has the loudest voice in the world. It has used that voice many, many times to get it's way over issues that, without this sort of diplomatic work, would probably have cost the lives of thousands of Americans and other races.

To pull out due to a knee jerk reaction over Iraq is childish and ignorant. It's like the big boy in a game of soccer who finds that the rules don't go his way so he decides to take the ball home.
Thing is, he can only do that once. After that, nobody will ever play with him again.

Yeah and if we have a civil war then liberals are public enemy number one in my books.

They wanted the UN and now we have it and look what a scam it is.

It is their creation and its failure rests on their shoulders.

Originally posted by THENEO
Yeah and if we have a civil war then liberals are public enemy number one in my books.

They wanted the UN and now we have it and look what a scam it is.

It is their creation and its failure rests on their shoulders.

Psst...Canuck.....what's with the "we" stuff?
The comments on a civil war are just pure garbage & Right Wing fantasy. New s Flash for you: what has come to be in power & representative of the Right wing these days is simply a minority in power - most Americans line up opposite Tom DeLay. except Thomas.

Originally posted by William
Um... don't forget the massive NYC Police costs for security during UN sessions and the like.

The HQ was only based in NYC because the land was donated and to make spying on diplomats easier for the US Government.

The original choice was London.

The UN is like communism, it's a utopian idea that just doesn't work. It can't work until and unless it gets REAL authority.

It can never have REAL authority because the USA, Great Britain and most other FIRST world countries are NEVER going to relinquish their sovereignty to the UN.

I assure you of one thing a Liberal and a Conservative will shake hands and make up long enough to overthow ANYBODY who attempts to put our military in Blue on a 100% basis.

Look at how pissed we all get when they attempt to put one or two units of the Army in Blue!

The UN, like many other organizations dripping with bureacrats is gridlocked, overbudget, and totally incapable of decision making...

P...
m...

[Edited on 11-25-2003 by Springer]

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
I agree! Those who spend the "most" money should obviously get the "most" in return. Thats how it works here in America...and if its good enough for us its good enough for the rest of the world.
Why have a social institution based on reason and international law that would try to look at all sides of an issue and legitimate with an ounce of fairness??? It justs gets in the way.
I believe that if the UN isn't going to do as its told by a "member" nation than the whole system is f**cked and needs to be replaced at once.
This is good policy in other areas of the world as well. Take California for example. Since they are one of the highest "financial" contributors to the federal tax-sluch pile, they should also be given unilateral ability to push their agenda onto the rest of the country. It just makes sense. And if say, Alabama, didn't want to impose those high gasoline taxes, high polution standards and pro-marijuana policies, California could have the right to "disband the union" or even pre-emtively strike the "bass-ackward r*dnecks" living in Alabama.
But what about the differences in cultures, you might ask??? What about respecting Alabama's soverign rights or even the southeast coalition of SC, GA, AL and FLA??? Well we all know their illiterate religious fanatics who want to turn the country into a judeo-christian theocracy...so the kind of have it comin...


Money, Money Money.....dont let it change ya!

I'm sure you think you are quite the pundit, but I assure you, your ignorance is outdone only by your stupidity. Your analogy merely proves that.
As far as the U.N. telling anyone to do something, what, do you thin kit has already become the ultimate authority? By whose basis of morality? Syria's? Maybe your buddy's over in North Korea? Putin's?
Clue you in on something, the U.N. doesn't do what it was designed to do, all it does is try and be an instrument by which the non-producers take from the producers, and the tyrants try and justify themselves internationally. A body of law, you say? You are delusional. Their "law" is founded on thin air. That, I feel quite confident, means nothing to you and BT, to others it means alot.

And if you're gonna bomb anything, bomb California and the rest of the freak states. We here in Alabama still believe in the concept of states' rights and hope for its return, unlike the liberal freaks who want to keep such rights away and want to regulate everything for everybody.

Thomas...why all this anger??? Im shocked! I was agreeing with you. Money and might make right! Absolutely! I was merely taking your analogy from the first post and placing it in a different enviroment. Whats the problem..its YOUR analogy!!!
And you have a second good point. If money and might have problems, they can always fall back on the "morality" clause. Sounds good to me.
Like you, I believe that one morality is better than the other, one god better than the other and one political institution better than all others EVER tried or conceived.
To me, thomas, there is only jesus, the marines, the flag, the constitution, being a republican and owning a dog. ANYTHING other than that is threatening to MY VERY WAY OF LIFE...and as jesus is my witness, I kill anyone who tries to tell me differently.
I know what I know and thats all I'll ever need to know. How do I know?? well...I just know.
Like you said, the UN just takes from the producers and gives to the non-producers. This redistribution is anti-american and certainly anti-christian. What self respecting christian would think jesus would approve of the poor of the world being fed and clothed. Not the jesus I know and love. The Jesus I know, would walk right into that big UN building and start kicking out the amoral countries like Syria, Chian and Russia in two seconds. Heck after he kicked them all out he would take the US in one hand and Isreal in the other and go marching off into eternity with all the gold.
Commies, fags, liberals and anti-christians will all be left behind to suffer the torments of hell. Hopefully jesus will be lenient and send them a few Adam Smith's books so they can learn a little red-blooded-capitolism and save their pathetic souls. Persoanlly, I hope jesus justs lets them burn.


Why would you call me stupid thomas...I agree with you all the way into the sunset

Reform the UN? Why?

IMO, we should quit that organization, stop giving them money out of *my pocket & yours*, kick the UN out of NY (& the USA totally) & consolidate efforts to solving our own problems before we much up the rest of the world any more than we have already.