• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Americans hate the U.N. ..?

R

RSMemphis

Golden Member
It is interesting to me how much hatred there is in this country for the U.N., and yet it is such a perfect instrument for the administration (not just the current one, Clinton, Bush Sr. etc. used it as an instrument as well).
In case you don't read the whole thing, read my last sentence.

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2560617.stm?dynamic_vote=ON#vote_tp_iraq_war

Some exerpts:

Reports say several other members of the Council are upset at the extent to which the US took charge of handing out copies to the others and editing the versions to be given to the non-nuclear powers. [...]It had been previously agreed that the UN would make copies of the 12,000-page declaration and hand them out itself.

Another diplomat quoted by the Reuters news agency said he believed the Iraqi declaration listed foreign suppliers which had dealt with Iraq.

The disclosure of their names could prove embarrassing for members of the the UN Security Council and other nations, he said.

Which I find disturbingly likely.

I do not think that the dossier really has a lot of information on how to cook up nuclear weapons. I mean, seriously, anyone who studied physics knows the principles on how these weapons work, and while it is very difficult to ACTUALLY MAKE THEM, because of the necessary ingredients, most of the knowledge is not a secret. Making extremely effective ones like the US and Russia have them, yes, but in general, no.

But I agree with one thing - the U. N. is very quickly becoming very obsolete.

Edit: too much italic
 
The U.N. constantly tries to stop the raping and pillaging of the world by the U.S.; we constantly do not go along with the UN. I don't think Americans hate it, but sure, people in power don't like to see an international organization try and take away some of that power.

Tim
 
Because we are so powerful the UN expects us to pay 10 times more than anyone else on earth combined.

The UN tries to change laws written in our constitiution.

The UN helped send our boys into Mogadishu Africa to get slaughtered because we were not allowed to protect ourselves properly --- but we were allowed to graciously donate more food and medicines than any other Continent.

Who needs who more... Do we need the UN or does the UN need us?

When a terrible disaster strikes a country the United States of America is there to help before the UN even gets their pompous asses out of bed.
 
UN = New Aged League of Nations

The only power it derives is from the United States. Why does the United States government and it's tax payers need to go through a middle man (The UN), when we could and do just as easily handle world politics on our own. At this point the government is using the UN as a PR platform, nothing else.
 
It is not UN or US hate relationships.

It is strong vs the weak.

US is strong and rest are weak.

If any other nation has similar military, economic, technological powers as US, US will pee in its pants as well .. right now there is no comptetition.


US is supreme .. and UN is the toilet paper we need to use.


 
the idea that the un is always right and the us is wrong seems to be the way things are.... the un is flawed like anything else, and made up of flawed countries. why trust it more. i don't trust europes judgement anymore now then before, they've f*cked stuff up enough in the past that they shouldn't have a say anymore😛 its all politics. europe and its eu can't even get together and fight poverty or strife in places near them like africa or wherever because they are too busy bickering amoungst themselvse and trying to divert attention by picking on the us. its alright to pick on the big dog ofcourse, lets em avoid looking in the mirror.


 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
the idea that the un is always right and the us is wrong seems to be the way things are.... the un is flawed like anything else, and made up of flawed countries. why trust it more. i don't trust europes judgement anymore now then before
--snip--
Click to expand...

Okay, anyone who knows anything about the UN does not think that it is always right and the US is always wrong - I know better than that.

All I am saying is if the UN is really just "toilet paper" (LOL toilet paper) it should just be removed.
However, a lot of what the UN does is low profile, very exciting work (UNESCO comes to mind, for instance).
I am not sure though that the political profile of the UN still makes sense. It has come to depend too much on the permanent members of the security council and it is a play ball at such.

 
Originally posted by: RSMemphis
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
the idea that the un is always right and the us is wrong seems to be the way things are.... the un is flawed like anything else, and made up of flawed countries. why trust it more. i don't trust europes judgement anymore now then before
--snip--
Click to expand...

Okay, anyone who knows anything about the UN does not think that it is always right and the US is always wrong - I know better than that.

All I am saying is if the UN is really just "toilet paper" (LOL toilet paper) it should just be removed.
However, a lot of what the UN does is low profile, very exciting work (UNESCO comes to mind, for instance).
I am not sure though that the political profile of the UN still makes sense. It has come to depend too much on the permanent members of the security council and it is a play ball at such.
Click to expand...


UN does major work for third world nations. UNESCO, UNICEF, WHO, UNDP .. these oranizations help most third world poor nations. Also UN ensures peace in regional conflicts.

However, when its US vs UN at political level, UN holds no power as of now
15 -25 years ago with USSR and in cold war, UN has a bi polar arrangement.

Rigth now, UN has just one power dominating its political agendas.

Tough luck, but what else can be done ? Those nations that feel UN is not useful for them are free to leave .. and I see UN playing no role in US policies specially after 9/11 whatsoever.

It is like : " Dare stop us " from uncle sam .. and you cannot blame uncle for it . he is too powerful now, and will be for a long long time to come.

Glad and proud to say that 🙂







 
The UN has several problems.

1. Funding, one country pays too much of the bill.
2. The UN has no military forced for enforcement of resolutions.
3. The UN Relies heavily one country to do enforcement, so things are enforced as that one country sees fit.
4. TO many varied opinions to be effective at anything.
 
Originally posted by: charrison
The UN has several problems.

1. Funding, one country pays too much of the bill.
2. The UN has no military forced for enforcement of resolutions.
3. The UN Relies heavily one country to do enforcement, so things are enforced as that one country sees fit.
4. TO many varied opinions to be effective at anything.
Click to expand...


If you consider funding to UN as % of GDP, US pays less than some nations.

However, 25% of UN budget is from US, roughly. Hence US has every right to raise its voice when its interests are at stake.

Also 23.7% of peace keeping budget is from US and US has 800 personel ( only ) in the force.

UN and US both need each other for various reasons and they will come up with a mutualy profitable plan .. republicans are astute businessmen .. sometimes more businessmen than politicians.

Some UN/US topics
 
I'd personally like to see the Us and UK withdraw and form their own coalition. The UN has become a joke. They should change it to UP, Union of Appeasement.
 
Originally posted by: Nitemare
I'd personally like to see the Us and UK withdraw and form their own coalition. The UN has become a joke. They should change it to UP, Union of Appeasement.
Click to expand...

The UN has great value to the US, and it has nothing to do with arms or coalitions. Notice the UN is still here? Why? Not because of liberals and not because of conservative or democrats or republicans. For all the bitching and moaning about the UN, it is still here. Think on that.
 
Originally posted by: CPA
This American hates them.
Click to expand...

Most likely you and everyone you know is alive because of them. Hate is useless in politics, because it clouds judgement. Anger can be good if it is directed to constructive purpose.
 
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Originally posted by: Nitemare
I'd personally like to see the Us and UK withdraw and form their own coalition. The UN has become a joke. They should change it to UP, Union of Appeasement.
Click to expand...

The UN has great value to the US, and it has nothing to do with arms or coalitions. Notice the UN is still here? Why? Not because of liberals and not because of conservative or democrats or republicans. For all the bitching and moaning about the UN, it is still here. Think on that.
Click to expand...

I cannot think of anything that the UN can do that our own coalition could not do better...

Last good thing I think the UN did was clean up Milosevic's genocide efforts...but then again there is not that much oil in Poland now is there...
 
Why not move the UN headquatres to Afghanistan or the Pakistan/India border. Let em work their wonders over there.
 
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Originally posted by: CPA
This American hates them.
Click to expand...

Most likely you and everyone you know is alive because of them. Hate is useless in politics, because it clouds judgement. Anger can be good if it is directed to constructive purpose.
Click to expand...

This American is angry at them...


hmmm...nope, have to agree with Hayabusarider on this one....hate them

Why not go back to NATO with the exclusion of France of course...?
 
Cast your mind back to the days before most of you were born, the Cuban Missle Crisis. The UN in and of itself did not stop it. What it did do was provide a forum, and an opportunity to engage in all sorts of back door diplomacy, which I wager is still going on today. It is curious that I have been called an isolationist for not approving wholesale bombing of Iraq, while some of those who accuse wish isolate ourselves from diplomacy. Want a more pragmatic reason? Then here is this. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
 
Originally posted by: MinorityReport[/b
Also 23.7% of peace keeping budget is from US and US has 800 personel ( only ) in the force.
Click to expand...


The number of 800 is bit misleading. I think the 800 number only the peacekeepers that wear blueshirts. The US usually sends peacekeepers in under NATO, not the UN. There are currently 10-15K US troops in bosnia/kosovo right now.

 
Originally posted by: RSMemphis
It is interesting to me how much hatred there is in this country for the U.N., and yet it is such a perfect instrument for the administration (not just the current one, Clinton, Bush Sr. etc. used it as an instrument as well).
In case you don't read the whole thing, read my last sentence.

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2560617.stm?dynamic_vote=ON#vote_tp_iraq_war

Some exerpts:

Reports say several other members of the Council are upset at the extent to which the US took charge of handing out copies to the others and editing the versions to be given to the non-nuclear powers. [...]It had been previously agreed that the UN would make copies of the 12,000-page declaration and hand them out itself.

Another diplomat quoted by the Reuters news agency said he believed the Iraqi declaration listed foreign suppliers which had dealt with Iraq.

The disclosure of their names could prove embarrassing for members of the the UN Security Council and other nations, he said.

Which I find disturbingly likely.

I do not think that the dossier really has a lot of information on how to cook up nuclear weapons. I mean, seriously, anyone who studied physics knows the principles on how these weapons work, and while it is very difficult to ACTUALLY MAKE THEM, because of the necessary ingredients, most of the knowledge is not a secret. Making extremely effective ones like the US and Russia have them, yes, but in general, no.

But I agree with one thing - the U. N. is very quickly becoming very obsolete.

Edit: too much italic
Click to expand...


Jesus man, the US hates anything that isn't American, and they even hate things American too.


 
Originally posted by: MinorityReport
Originally posted by: charrison
The UN has several problems.

1. Funding, one country pays too much of the bill.
2. The UN has no military forced for enforcement of resolutions.
3. The UN Relies heavily one country to do enforcement, so things are enforced as that one country sees fit.
4. TO many varied opinions to be effective at anything.
Click to expand...


If you consider funding to UN as % of GDP, US pays less than some nations.

However, 25% of UN budget is from US, roughly. Hence US has every right to raise its voice when its interests are at stake.

Also 23.7% of peace keeping budget is from US and US has 800 personel ( only ) in the force.

UN and US both need each other for various reasons and they will come up with a mutualy profitable plan .. republicans are astute businessmen .. sometimes more businessmen than politicians.

Some UN/US topics
Click to expand...


And the US doesn't pay what it owes, so try again.


 
Last good thing I think the UN did was clean up Milosevic's genocide efforts...but then again there is not that much oil in Poland now is there...
---------------------------

Another passionately opinionated and well informed American. 😀
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top