LMAO - Kofi Annan on Sesame Street this morning

[Queasy]

Talk about propoganda for the UN.

They had two of the Sesame Street characters fighting over who was going to sing a song. Kofi Annan pop it goes like this:

Annan: "Hello, can I help you?"
Character: "Who are you?"
Annan: "I'm Kofi Annan. Secretary General of the United Nations. What are you fighting over?"
Blah talking about who was going to sing the song blah
Annan: "Well, why don't we all sing the song together?"
Character: "Yeah, let's do this the way the UN does everything...Together!"
commence singing.

Excuse me while I go puke my lunch. When was the last time the UN successfully did anything together? Kosovo? Rwanda? Somalia? Iraq? N Korea?

Now, I'm not saying the UN is a bad idea. But, the UN is so dysfunctional right now. The inmates are running the asylum and there is no togetherness. Its all about who can get the most while giving the least.

 

[Miramonti]

The UN was ok until gw tried to rape it.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Some countries veto just about anything in the UN, like international courts or anything to do with Israel.

 

[VioletAura]

Doesn't he have more important things to do? Oh wait, he works for the UN... nevermind.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: jjsole
The UN was ok until gw tried to rape it.

Yeah, 8+ years of sanctions imposed by the UN on Iraq really helped. UN is a waste and needed to be dissolved, maybe put some of the resources in the red cross.

KK

 

[Nitemare]

Should have said, stop the fighting or else, or if you do continue to keep on fighting, I will tell you not to fight again, this will continue until you either choose voluntarily to stop or Fred comes down here and kicks yo @ss


Capiche?

 

[Miramonti]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: jjsole The UN was ok until gw tried to rape it.

Yeah, 8+ years of sanctions imposed by the UN on Iraq really helped. UN is a waste and needed to be dissolved, maybe put some of the resources in the red cross. KK

True. If the sanctions weren't so damn useless we wouldn't be getting bombarded by all of their chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons like we have been lately. 😀

btw, there's a P&N board for all the "anti-UN" and "blame the french" winers. 🙂

 

[Danman]

Originally posted by: jjsole
The UN was ok until gw tried to rape it.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Some countries veto just about anything in the UN, like international courts or anything to do with Israel.

Honestly, anyone from Europe should shut it when it comes to wars and imperialism.

 

[Miramonti]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1 Some countries veto just about anything in the UN, like international courts or anything to do with Israel.

Honestly, anyone from Europe should shut it when it comes to wars and imperialism.

Unfortunately its not a european argument any more than it is fact.

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: jjsole

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: jjsole The UN was ok until gw tried to rape it.

Yeah, 8+ years of sanctions imposed by the UN on Iraq really helped. UN is a waste and needed to be dissolved, maybe put some of the resources in the red cross. KK

True. If the sanctions weren't so damn useless we wouldn't be getting bombarded by all of their chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons like we have been lately. 😀

btw, there's a P&N board for all the "anti-UN" and "blame the french" winers. 🙂

No, you are mistaken, there's a P&N board for all the "pro-UN" and "bend over and take it like a french" winers. 😛

KK

 

[ViRGE]

Oh for the love of Mike, get over it.😛 Annan shows up in a kids TV show for a few minutes to do something nice, and you people gripe about it. I swear we need to plug some of you guys in to your own personal Matricies; it's the only way you'll be happy.😛

 

[StageLeft]

Unfortunately I'm beginning to become of the opinion that the UN is essentially a failed entity, and further no organization like it can exist. It's not a shortcoming of the UN, just because it's the UN, but rather the rather that a group of unlike-minded individuals cannot efficiently work towards a common goal. You see the same thing in government. All too often a lot more gets done when a dictator comes in and tells it like it is, instead of people with different ideas bickering and debating.

In the UN you have western countries and the polar opposites of poor African nations, middle eastern nations, etc. How can such different entities work towards a common goal when in fact they do not have the same goals? The UN has been crushed under its own weight and though I admire the ideals of such a group and wish wholeheartedly that one could execute properly, it just doesn't seem reasonable at this time. NATO, with a tighter set of goals and a more similar group of nations, is able to get more done when it needs to.

 

[CPA]

You are kidding me right? What kind of one-world leftist propaganda is that?

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Unfortunately I'm beginning to become of the opinion that the UN is essentially a failed entity, and further no organization like it can exist. It's not a shortcoming of the UN, just because it's the UN, but rather the rather that a group of unlike-minded individuals cannot efficiently work towards a common goal. You see the same thing in government. All too often a lot more gets done when a dictator comes in and tells it like it is, instead of people with different ideas bickering and debating.

In the UN you have western countries and the polar opposites of poor African nations, middle eastern nations, etc. How can such different entities work towards a common goal when in fact they do not have the same goals? The UN has been crushed under its own weight and though I admire the ideals of such a group and wish wholeheartedly that one could execute properly, it just doesn't seem reasonable at this time. NATO, with a tighter set of goals and a more similar group of nations, is able to get more done when it needs to.

I don't think all issues are polarized based on region or wealth. Also, keep in mind that democratic establishments ALWAYS sacrifice efficiency in the interests of producing the most utilitarian policies possible. I do agree that as it is, the UN is half failed, but there are remedies. Removing veto power would quickly improve efficiency and put the UN back on the road to actually functioning correctly.

 

[UNCjigga]

The whole structure of the Security Council has a lot to do with the UNs dysfunctionality. Like most successful democracies, the UN really needs a two-house system:

One house would have clout/voting power/etc. determined by the population of a country.

The second house would have clout/votes etc. determined by GDP of the country.

Hopefully, these two houses could balance each other out and make forward progress. This would call for an executive board elected every 5-8 years (don't call it the 'Security Council'...you would only convene independent security councils for wars involving more than 2 countries.) Its key that the executive board be elected, and not randomly determined on some half-assed rotating basis.