Because people are wanting some response to Iraq violating UN resolutions ...

[Czar]

Should all countries who violate UN resolutions be punished in some way instead of doing nothing?

 

[ToBeMe]

I suppose it would depend upong the violation now wouldn't it???? The way I see it the UN isn't strong enough to enforce every violation and it would simply mean the end of them since nearly every member has violated some resolution..........

 

[AvesPKS]

Yes, except when said country is able to disobey with impunity...

 

[ElFenix]

hes trying to catch us in a trap, i know it! you know those jealous 3rd world countries got some crap passed that we're in violation of!

 

[snooker]

I think some sort of Punishment should happen. The seriousness of the situation should have something to do with the severity of the punishment.

 

[Linflas]

No doubt you have a link ready for some UN resolution the US has broken just waiting for the right time to post...

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Czar
Should all countries who violate UN resolutions be punished in some way instead of doing nothing?

Allow me to demonstrate, on myself, what the UN does 99.999% of the time:

*pretends to lightly slap self on the wrist*

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: Czar
Should all countries who violate UN resolutions be punished in some way instead of doing nothing?

Allow me to demonstrate, on myself, what the UN does 99.999% of the time:

*pretends to lightly slap self on the wrist*

heh, pretend is right

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
hes trying to catch us in a trap, i know it! you know those jealous 3rd world countries got some crap passed that we're in violation of!

Actually, I would put down twenty bucks that says Czar is trying to make a case for us going to war with Israel.

 

[vi edit]

It's a trap. Get an axe.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: sward666

Originally posted by: ElFenix
hes trying to catch us in a trap, i know it! you know those jealous 3rd world countries got some crap passed that we're in violation of!

Actually, I would put down twenty bucks that says Czar is trying to make a case for us going to war with Israel.

yeah, that'd work too. how many are they in violation of?

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
It's a trap. Get an axe.

LMAO!

 

[Czar]

hehe I'm just wondering if you(as in the people on the forum) want the UN to act on some situations where it suits the situation and sometimes not, like a law that is only valid sometimes but not always.

 

[ToBeMe]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: sward666

Originally posted by: ElFenix
hes trying to catch us in a trap, i know it! you know those jealous 3rd world countries got some crap passed that we're in violation of!

Actually, I would put down twenty bucks that says Czar is trying to make a case for us going to war with Israel.

yeah, that'd work too. how many are they in violation of?

BINGO! I think someone just hit the nail on its head................

 

[Garet Jax]

Absolutely. If the UN has taken the time to agree on its resolutions, then every member country should be forced to abide by them. Otherwise why bother making the resolution.

This goes hand in hand with speeding. Everyone knows that speeding is punishable with a fine, but people still do it. Why? Because they know there is a good chance they will get away with it. If the police were able to find and punish every speeder, then no one would ever speed.

If the UN doesn't punish every member country who violates the resolution than they are saying it is OK to ignore us.

 

[Wallydraigle]

I don't give two sh!ts about the UN. I do think, however, that if you have acted beligerently toward your neighbors in the past, and show a willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone, even your own people, if it suits you, you should be made to go far away.

 

[ElDonAntonio]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: sward666

Originally posted by: ElFenix
hes trying to catch us in a trap, i know it! you know those jealous 3rd world countries got some crap passed that we're in violation of!

Actually, I would put down twenty bucks that says Czar is trying to make a case for us going to war with Israel.

yeah, that'd work too. how many are they in violation of?

How many UN resolutions are there?

 

[rahvin]

Iraq unconditionally surrendered to the collaition forces during the gulf war, I think any situation where a nation is punished under one UN resolution and agrees to abide by a second and fails to should be punished again. This is the heart of what Bush told the UN. Either stand up and enforce mandates you applied with force by using force or be irrelevant. If any two bit dictator can thumb their noses at the UN after signing an agreement with the UN then the institution has little merit.

Make no mistake that if the US does act alone in IRAQ the UN will be irrelevant from the US political perspective and without US participation the UN will become worthless, hell the US funds 30% of the UN budget.

And yes Czar, Israel should return to their pre-67 borders, but ONLY if their security is guaranteed first.

 

[BoberFett]

IT'S A TRAP!

 

[43st]

Originally posted by: rahvin
Iraq unconditionally surrendered to the collaition forces during the gulf war, I think any situation where a nation is punished under one UN resolution and agrees to abide by a second and fails to should be punished again. This is the heart of what Bush told the UN. Either stand up and enforce mandates you applied with force by using force or be irrelevant. If any two bit dictator can thumb their noses at the UN after signing an agreement with the UN then the institution has little merit.

Make no mistake that if the US does act alone in IRAQ the UN will be irrelevant from the US political perspective and without US participation the UN will become worthless, hell the US funds 30% of the UN budget.

And yes Czar, Israel should return to their pre-67 borders, but ONLY if their security is guaranteed first.

The "trick" here is that if the UN enforces it's mandates on Iraq then it needs to also enforce it's mandates on the US, not to mention Kyoto and ICC. It's amazing to see the US leaders on TV talking about punishing rogue nations... Look in the F***'en mirror guys!

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: ToBeMe
I suppose it would depend upong the violation now wouldn't it???? The way I see it the UN isn't strong enough to enforce every violation and it would simply mean the end of them since nearly every member has violated some resolution..........

Exactly...all violations aren't equal to each other...

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Thera

Originally posted by: rahvin
Iraq unconditionally surrendered to the collaition forces during the gulf war, I think any situation where a nation is punished under one UN resolution and agrees to abide by a second and fails to should be punished again. This is the heart of what Bush told the UN. Either stand up and enforce mandates you applied with force by using force or be irrelevant. If any two bit dictator can thumb their noses at the UN after signing an agreement with the UN then the institution has little merit.

Make no mistake that if the US does act alone in IRAQ the UN will be irrelevant from the US political perspective and without US participation the UN will become worthless, hell the US funds 30% of the UN budget.

And yes Czar, Israel should return to their pre-67 borders, but ONLY if their security is guaranteed first.

The "trick" here is that if the UN enforces it's mandates on Iraq then it needs to also enforce it's mandates on the US, not to mention Kyoto and ICC. It's amazing to see the US leaders on TV talking about punishing rogue nations... Look in the F***'en mirror guys!

Maybe it's just me, but I think there's an wee bit of difference between not adhereing to factory smoke stack pollution and violating war sanctions and producing and accumulating biological, chemical, and possibly even nuclear weapons. But then again, that's just me.

 

[ToBeMe]

Originally posted by: Thera

Originally posted by: rahvin
Iraq unconditionally surrendered to the collaition forces during the gulf war, I think any situation where a nation is punished under one UN resolution and agrees to abide by a second and fails to should be punished again. This is the heart of what Bush told the UN. Either stand up and enforce mandates you applied with force by using force or be irrelevant. If any two bit dictator can thumb their noses at the UN after signing an agreement with the UN then the institution has little merit.

Make no mistake that if the US does act alone in IRAQ the UN will be irrelevant from the US political perspective and without US participation the UN will become worthless, hell the US funds 30% of the UN budget.

And yes Czar, Israel should return to their pre-67 borders, but ONLY if their security is guaranteed first.

The "trick" here is that if the UN enforces it's mandates on Iraq then it needs to also enforce it's mandates on the US, not to mention Kyoto and ICC. It's amazing to see the US leaders on TV talking about punishing rogue nations... Look in the F***'en mirror guys!

Oh so every nation whom does not agree with or sign a mandate or proposal is now violating a resolution too????:Q
Need I remind you of a few "other" nations whom did/do not agree also???

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: Czar
Should all countries who violate UN resolutions be punished in some way instead of doing nothing?

Sure, and any country or countries capable of backing their play should be allowed free reign to enforce the resolutions of their choosing. So if the Arab countries feel froggy about Israel, then let them have a go at it and see how they do once again. Same for the US and Iraq.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Thera

Originally posted by: rahvin
Iraq unconditionally surrendered to the collaition forces during the gulf war, I think any situation where a nation is punished under one UN resolution and agrees to abide by a second and fails to should be punished again. This is the heart of what Bush told the UN. Either stand up and enforce mandates you applied with force by using force or be irrelevant. If any two bit dictator can thumb their noses at the UN after signing an agreement with the UN then the institution has little merit.

Make no mistake that if the US does act alone in IRAQ the UN will be irrelevant from the US political perspective and without US participation the UN will become worthless, hell the US funds 30% of the UN budget.

And yes Czar, Israel should return to their pre-67 borders, but ONLY if their security is guaranteed first.

The "trick" here is that if the UN enforces it's mandates on Iraq then it needs to also enforce it's mandates on the US, not to mention Kyoto and ICC. It's amazing to see the US leaders on TV talking about punishing rogue nations... Look in the F***'en mirror guys!

how are two treaties we didn't sign enforcable on us?