Canada calls out the UN

[irishScott]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14115925

Wish we'd follow suit.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Never thought I'd see the day where Canada had bigger balls than the US.

Shit... never thought I'd see the day where Canada had balls... .

 

[xaeniac]

the UN is nothing but a bureaucratic joke.

 

[Craig234]

the UN is nothing but a bureaucratic joke.

People who say that are nothing but bad jokes of citizens.

Let's have more war, more poverty, more tyranny. That's all such people stand for.

They're basically childish morons who express some adolescent immaturity in their politics, rebelling against any 'cooperation'. They resemble the street gang mentality about crime.

They're 'proving something' by opposing police and the law.

People wonder how could the citizens of Germany, Japan and Italy have been such idiots to choose the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, the militarists in Japan.

They need to look no further than to these sorts of people who are clueless.

People wonder how the citizens of powerful empires could have supported massive slavery, murder, cruelty of the subjugated people for their own benefit.

They need look no further than these people who attack any effort for civilization to try to improve the human condition.

They don't know they want these terrible things - but they are helping to cause them by being idiots about any efforts to improve things.

You get an idiot like John Bolton saying something about 'blowing up a floor of the UN' and these people cheer him and demand he be put in place as the UN ambassador.

This is a downside of democracy, that it's drug down by its worst people.

 

[PokerGuy]

The UN is a complete waste of time and resources. Sad to see that Canada now has more guts than the US. NK as the head of committee on disarmament... yeah, that makes sense. Only a complete moron like Craig could defend such stupidity.

 

[nonlnear]

Craig, do you support the treatment of North Korea as a legitimate chair of the disarmament talks? Also, do you believe the UN is a democratic institution?

 

[KMFJD]

Kinda like when Saudi Arabia is/was on the human rights committee?

/confused

 

[Braznor]

Shut down that toothless watchdog and save money.

The UN is the best friend of everything opposite to commonsense.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Let's have more war, more poverty, more tyranny.

Nuclear weapons would be the primary reason for no WW3.

In Africa, a UN backed "president's" supporters are slaughtering innocents under the watch of UN Peacekeepers:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/02/ivory-coast-massacre-1000-killed-duekoue_n_844000.html

He said they estimated that more than 1,000 civilians were killed.
...
The International Federation of the Red Cross put the death toll at Duekoue at about 800, in separate and independent visits Thursday and Friday.

Nicholson, the Caritas spokesman, said the killings occurred over three days in a neighborhood controlled by fighters loyal to internationally recognized President Alassane Ouattara

The U.N. military spokesman said he had no information about mass killings in Duekoue, though he confirmed there are nearly 1,000 peacekeepers based there.

People wonder how could the citizens of Germany, Japan and Italy have been such idiots to choose the likes of Hitler, Mussolini, the militarists in Japan.

Yet, their citizens were smart enough to join the precursor to the United Nations, the League of Nations.

This is a downside of democracy, that it's drug down by its worst people.

If only the enlightened were allowed to govern, pesky universal suffrage.

They're 'proving something' by opposing police and the law.

The UN is the police and not America? Great, that means that we can cut our defense budget big time and pull out of shit hole "countries" and let the UN Peacekeepers deal with it and other nations pay for it.

People wonder how the citizens of powerful empires could have supported massive slavery, murder, cruelty of the subjugated people for their own benefit.

The main thing that has changed is that our governments (The West, Russia, Japan, etc.) do not do the dirty work anymore. The governments of select countries basically enslave their own people for the benefit of their ruling parties. Each time you buy an Apple product, clothing, etc. made by de facto slave labor in another country, you contribute to this "problem." It provides you with lower prices (raises your standard of living) and you do not have to see the working conditions that women and children slave away in their entire lives because it is all overseas and out of sight. It is not our troops that are getting killed when the protests / revolts start, the governments of these countries slaughter their own people to maintain power. I am not saying it is right, as a matter of fact, it is a terrible situation. I am saying that many of the ills traditionally ascribed to imperialism still exist in the world, they are just no longer caused by imperialism.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2143681

the UN is nothing but a bureaucratic joke.

Regarding an exit from the UN, that would be silly. We have a permanent seat on the security council and can foil whatever silliness comes our way with a veto.

But, that does not mean that we should ignore stupidity at the UN.

For example, Libya and Iran on the "UN Human Rights Council" or the fact that one of the few countries actively expanding their nuclear arsenal is the head of a nuclear disarmament council:
http://www.cnsnews.com/node/54774

Libya, Iran Accuse Israel of ‘Genocide’ at U.N. Human Rights Council

When things like that occur, we need to appoint a new diplomat to represent America in these "councils." I believe that man is Dennis Miller, backed by the writers of South Park and Saturday Night Live.

 

[Craig234]

Craig, do you support the treatment of North Korea as a legitimate chair of the disarmament talks? Also, do you believe the UN is a democratic institution?

I find such a thing to be pretty crazy and outrageous - but no more so than seeing the lobbyist or vice president of some industry appointed for donations to the government regulatory position in charge of that industry, selling out the public interest - which greatly increased under Bush without a peep from the right who complains about it with the UN.

Sometimes there are bureaucratic and political 'nicities' that lead to such things, but I'd ask anyone who is complaining about it, beyond the superficial outrageousness, how is the disarmament project actually harmed by that - and who is worse for the project, North Korea's temporary role, or that person and people like them who want to destroy the UN?

As for the UN being a Democratic institution - it's not what it should be, in part because of these critics. They cripple it - and then criticize it for not being better. These sort of the people are the ones who cause dictators to be in power - and you see many of them praise a 'benevolent dictator' over democracy. As bad as they are, they seem to have some understanding they can't be trusted to elect a good leader.

So, let's improve the UN - but it's a hell of a lot better than not having that place with the efforts for global communication, for the respect of each nation to some voice, where the general assembly can vote on things even if the Security Council has to buy off five powerful members with a veto for themselves and their friends that cripples it.

The discussion should be not so much about the UN now - though it does a lot of good - than about the need for a better UN protecting global political stability instead of the race for each nation and region getting more power at the expense of others, rather than the ongoing wars that conflict has caused.

The critics here are simpletons who know only to demand the right to try to get more power by any means, however violent, framing every alternative to that as 'surrender'.

It's nothing new - early in the nuclear age, there was a group of Americans and military leaders who though it was imperative we launch a first-strike nuclear war against the USSR and China. We need the people with more of a clue to run things, as they generally have.

 

[MotF Bane]

I find such a thing to be pretty crazy and outrageous - but no more so than seeing the lobbyist or vice president of some industry appointed for donations to the government regulatory position in charge of that industry, selling out the public interest - which greatly increased under Bush without a peep from the right who complains about it with the UN..

DIVERT! DIVERT!

That has zero relevance to the topic at hand. You could have ended it with the first dozen words or so, instead of creating a monstrous run-on sentence to bitch about something totally unrelated.

 

[Craig234]

Nuclear weapons would be the primary reason for no WW3.

We're discussing the UN, not nuclear weapons. The UN can do a lot to prevent war, more if it's strengthened and improved.

Some might say 'what do you want, one world government?' and I say no, a stronger UN is how to preserve what the world needs, diverse political power - it's the national model that leads to 'one world government', where one country or group of countries eventually establishes global dominance - likely with most other countries forced to serve them, and no shortage of tyranny, permanently.

Imagine the 'economic elites' globally from China to the US and elsewhere forming an alliance for their own interests. Oh, wait, you don't have to imagine a lot, as the tyrants of China and the world's largest corporation, based in the US, have gotten pretty cozy in the early stages of such a 'partnership'. How much do you see the US government really pushing on human rights in a place like China, compared to a place that's an 'enemy'?

In Africa, UN backed a "president's" supporters are slaughtering innocents under the watch of UN Peacekeepers:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/02/ivory-coast-massacre-1000-killed-duekoue_n_844000.html

Shocking, the UN is made very weak by its critics, who then say "look, they weren't terribly effective somewhere". How would that slaughter have gone with NO UN?

The UN peacekeeping does a lot of good. It could do more. It does a lot of other helpful things as well, especially against poverty.

Yet, their citizens were smart enough to join the precursor to the United Nations, the League of Nations.

Actually, Japan and Germany left the League of Nations - which the US never joined - in 1933. Less international peace organization went well soon after.

If only the enlightened were allowed to govern, pesky universal suffrage.

You ironically make my point.

The UN is the police and not America? Great, that means that we can cut our defense budget big time and pull out of shit hole "countries" and let the UN Peacekeepers deal with it and other nations pay for it.

You missed the point, also shocking. But yes, we can cut our defense budgets, and the UN being able to do more would largely work out better than our largely phony 'coalitions'.

They not only have the obviously bribed members - 'sure, Whateverstan in Eastern Europe will put their name on the list to attack someone thousands of miles away for a price'.

Even our closest ally Great Britain is right now doing an evaluation of their relationship with the US as one in which 'they are expected to act like our poodle'.

A broader based agenda for the planet might do well to help set the global use of force. The UN was not planning war with Iraq; they did approve the limited war in Libya.

The main thing that has changed is that our governments (The West, Russia, Japan, etc.) do not do the dirty work anymore. The governments of select countries basically enslave their own people for the benefit of their ruling parties. Each time you buy an Apple product, clothing, etc. made by de facto slave labor in another country, you contribute to this "problem." It provides you with lower prices (raises your standard of living) and you do not have to see the working conditions that women and children slave away in their entire lives because it is all overseas and out of sight. It is not our troops that are getting killed when the protests / revolts start, the governments of these countries slaughter their own people to maintain power. I am not saying it is right, as a matter of fact, it is a terrible situation. I am saying that many of the ills traditionally ascribed to imperialism still exist in the world, they are just no longer caused by imperialism.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2143681

I pretty much agree - I almost could have written the same thing, and almost had made a similar comment. Economic superiority/tyranny has evolved, but it's still there.

Regarding an exit from the UN, that would be silly. We have a permanent seat on the security council and can foil whatever silliness comes our way with a veto.

Which misses the point about the issues for the UN - it's a selfish comment. There are other issues, such as having more global cooperation and democracy, or less.

 

[piasabird]

The UN is a joke.

 

[Fear No Evil]

What is this thread aboot?

 

[Craig234]

nm

 

[matt0611]

The UN is all about corruption, greed, incompetence and waste.
The US should defund and leave the UN immediately.

This article reads like one from The Onion.
The UN is officially a fucking joke. (if it wasn't already one before, oh wait, didn't it have Libya on the human rights council? LMAO)

 

[Craig234]

The UN is all about corruption, greed, incompetence and waste.
The US should defund and leave the UN immediately.

When idiocy has ruined our citizens.

See my post above for more. You are for more war, tyranny, corruption,poverty.

 

[BeauJangles]

Never thought I'd see the day where Canada had bigger balls than the US.

Shit... never thought I'd see the day where Canada had balls... .

Canada might have different politics than the United States, but I fail to see many instances where they lack "balls." They're one of the only nations that pulls their weight in NATO. They are constantly involved in international politics and position themselves as a country that can help broker deals between the more polarized nations of the world.

I think they do a remarkably decent job of sticking to their principles and acting on what they believe is right and wrong, unlike many other nations who let themselves be co-opted and bullied into stances / actions they didn't want to be a part of.

 

[Jaepheth]

What is this thread aboot?

Canada doesn't want to play poker with a cheater, so now everyone's debating whether or not cards are the best device for playing poker.

 

[MotF Bane]

Canada doesn't want to play poker with a cheater, so now everyone's debating whether or not cards are the best device for playing poker.

Haha. :thumbsup:

 

[IndyColtsFan]

When idiocy has ruined our citizens....

..we get more posts like yours.

Good for Canada -- the US should also boycott it.

 

[Craig234]

Canada might have different politics than the United States, but I fail to see many instances where they lack "balls." They're one of the only nations that pulls their weight in NATO. They are constantly involved in international politics and position themselves as a country that can help broker deals between the more polarized nations of the world.

I think they do a remarkably decent job of sticking to their principles and acting on what they believe is right and wrong, unlike many other nations who let themselves be co-opted and bullied into stances / actions they didn't want to be a part of.

And their bright red police are secure enough in their masculinity to be called 'mounties'.

 

[CPA]

The presidency of the 65-member-nation conference rotates every four weeks.

This goes to show how ridiculously stupid the UN is.

 

[Whiskey16]

The presidency of the 65-member-nation conference rotates every four weeks.

This goes to show how ridiculously stupid the UN is.

No. Those stating such condemnation out of ignorance is evidence of something, though.

Yes, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, etc. have had the chair among the human rights council. So has the USA, and many would justly chastise it for well documented abuses. Same goes for arms control, etc.


Winston Churchill, "...jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war."


Such UN councils are forums for discourse among states involved in such issues. They also offer an opening for out of council meetings between member parties. As such, no state is automatically ostracized to the side-lines. To do so would nullify the discourse. All states are to have a voice in discussions and that is the prime and just cause for rotating chairs of councils. From human rights, health, disarmament, etc...

To directly BANISH a forum from discourse is immediate evidence of those who are inclined toward warfare and a might-make-right approach in all avenues. A knee jerk-reaction reaction to extreme partisanship and silencing of another increases tensions and more often than not incurs a detriment and post-postponing of a resolution.

Honest pragmatism and discussion by many here is lost in favour of boisterous show-boating. Present is little understanding of the practice and value of diplomatic forums. I count the current diplomatic ineptitude of this Canadian government within such low-brow bombasity. With John Baird (though none in this government may act without consent and direction of PM Harper's short leash) as the latest Minister of Foreign Affairs, such was all too predictable. A play to an ignorant, but hopefully what remains a minority base. Idealism of feeling for a short term pleasure rather than pragmatically thinking actions through.

BeauJangles, you presented praise of Canada as an honest international broker? Out of date and incorrect perceptions are clearly a gain towards Canada's image among laymen. To correct ya, certainly not this decade! With Canada's resounding defeat to obtaining a Security Council seat, other states are far more aware of current affairs. Canada is now led by a brutally partisan leadership...A prime international example is of Foriegn Affairs current direction towards 100% support upon Israel, with no room for criticism, and the even more belligerant call for a Palestinian statehood being one that is militarily disarmed and open to Isreal military incursion and control. A parrot for Israeli policy. No moderation there and zero opening for discussion among belligerants.

Much of what occurs among the diplomatic circles in the UN are quiet and behind the scenes. Unsurprisingly many here, as being from the USA and fed filtered snippets concenrnig the UN by their media and political gong show, only think of the UN as equating to the rather public Security Council actions and are oblivious to WHO, ICC, UNHCR, etc... What accomplishments that are made are quiet and behind the public scenes, unlike what the likes of you and others here (...plus the sad state of Canadian government rule) tend to desire -- flash and bangs of belligerent action and offending speech. That usually equates to a non-starter, of maintaining the status-quo, or worse of antagonising issues to a more problematic extreme.

Discourse is to be maintained among states and that is a lesson long learnt from the failed League of Nations and a demonstratable value that resulted in the UN and its continued global presence. Discourse is not always a cure-all but it is damned valuable.

 

[OCGuy]

The UN is only adored by wide-eyed college kids who want to buy the world a puppy.