• 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.

The UN and America: What say you?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Look, I don't have any illusions as to the effectiveness of the UN, but I'd say it's definitely a step in the right direction, and I have faith that there can be such a thing as an organization of many nations. It's something that the United States and many other countries have to put forth effort, if they want it to work.

In this thread, the OP does not offer any suggestions as to how the UN or international relations could be improved. He basically spews the same old line about how the rest of the world is just "jealous of our power" and is trying to reign us in, and that the US should not answer to or be accountable to anyone else because "we know what's best."

If you've read any of his other threads, cwjerome paints an image of the US as a superpower that's only trying to spread freedom, democracy, and the superior "western thought", you know - white man's burden. And no, I'm not exaggerating his position, it really is that extreme.

So if you think about it, what's more idealistic - having faith that nations can work together, or that there should be no global oranization, and that the US will "civilize" and bring freedom to the world, off superior firepower and strength.
 
Originally posted by: flawlssdistortn
So if you think about it, what's more idealistic that the US will "civilize" and bring freedom to the world, off superior firepower and strength.
Click to expand...
Not with the group we have running the country now!

 
Originally posted by: flawlssdistortn
Look, I don't have any illusions as to the effectiveness of the UN, but I'd say it's definitely a step in the right direction, and I have faith that there can be such a thing as an organization of many nations. It's something that the United States and many other countries have to put forth effort, if they want it to work.

In this thread, the OP does not offer any suggestions as to how the UN or international relations could be improved. He basically spews the same old line about how the rest of the world is just "jealous of our power" and is trying to reign us in, and that the US should not answer to or be accountable to anyone else because "we know what's best."

If you've read any of his other threads, cwjerome paints an image of the US as a superpower that's only trying to spread freedom, democracy, and the superior "western thought", you know - white man's burden. And no, I'm not exaggerating his position, it really is that extreme.

So if you think about it, what's more idealistic - having faith that nations can work together, or that there should be no global oranization, and that the US will "civilize" and bring freedom to the world, off superior firepower and strength.
Click to expand...
If the UN is not effective in its function then what good is it?

We are not at the point yet where what is good for one is good for all. Until we reach that point, an international organization that determines the actions of a state is not a good idea.

I'm also really tired of those who paint the US as some big bully simply by virtue of its economic and military prowess which puts us in the position of the world's superpower. In fact, it's ridiculously blind to ignore that is the way of our world. The powerful rule the pack and f those with the power don't want to rule the pack, someone else will gladly fill those shoes. People DO NOT share and share alike in this world. You can pretend otherwise, or claim it shouldn't be that way, but pretense and wishes do not make reality. Is there hypocrisy in our actions or lack of actions? Of course there is. But we can't do it all abnd take care of every single ill. There are priorities we must deal with and right now the ME is our biggest priority. We've tried diplomacy and that didn't work for us. The only other alternative is action and we've taken it. The US took action because the UN was unwilling to do so for a variety of reasons, few of them related to anything idealistic or humanitarian.

Oh, and as far as your reference to Kipling, I would suggest you find out the background of "White Man's Burden." It's actually an advocation of imperialism, not an admonishment of it as so many today have been erroneously led to believe.
 
look everyone, Captain Liberal is here, Tasteslikechicken.

How dare anyone in the US think that the idea of working with other nations is a good thing? Ideas! Bah! Nothing but dreamers are us liberals!

The whole issue and label of liberal elites is really one of the less intelligent arguments that the right puts forward (yes tlc, that includes you). Carterism, idealism, etc, etc...look at all these neat labels we have for the left.

Liberals are no more educationed, unless we are talking about people with advanced college degrees, than conservatives are. The income levels, really, are quite close....in fact many of the so-called differences between the left and the right are nothing more that myth....in fact, TLC, you and I discussed at length some of these very breakdowns after the election.

So lets get rid of the BS that is the 'liberal elites' label - I'm quite certain there are just as many people on the right who think of the left as "tree huggers", "hippes", "pot smokers", etc, etc, as there are people on the left who view the right as god fearing, Nascar loving rednecks. Lets have each side stop calling the silly names and talk about real issues, ok?
 
The United Nations is nothing more than cleverly veiled terrorists who use their aid to further their socialist agenda. The UN is a useless organization full of red tape and full of wasteful spending. The UN Mismanaged the Oil for Food Program. It is the UN's Fault that countries like Germany, France, and Russia stole money and sold arms to the Iraqi's right before the war.
 
Originally posted by: NeoV
look everyone, Captain Liberal is here, Tasteslikechicken.
Click to expand...
Infohawk? Is that you?

How dare anyone in the US think that the idea of working with other nations is a good thing? Ideas! Bah! Nothing but dreamers are us liberals!
Click to expand...
How does this address anything I've said? Working with other nations is a good idea as I've already stated. The problem is turning that idea into reality. Right now it's a failure and all the pontification in the world by the liebral elite doesn't change that one bit.

The whole issue and label of liberal elites is really one of the less intelligent arguments that the right puts forward (yes tlc, that includes you). Carterism, idealism, etc, etc...look at all these neat labels we have for the left.
Click to expand...
Yup. Like red-staters, neocons, slack-jawed-knuckle-draggers, chickenhawks, etc. You see, the right is by no means the sole proprietor of labels. In fact, the left have disingeniously taken labelling to new lows in the past few years.

Liberals are no more educationed, unless we are talking about people with advanced college degrees, than conservatives are. The income levels, really, are quite close....in fact many of the so-called differences between the left and the right are nothing more that myth....in fact, TLC, you and I discussed at length some of these very breakdowns after the election.

So lets get rid of the BS that is the 'liberal elites' label - I'm quite certain there are just as many people on the right who think of the left as "tree huggers", "hippes", "pot smokers", etc, etc, as there are people on the left who view the right as god fearing, Nascar loving rednecks. Lets have each side stop calling the silly names and talk about real issues, ok?
Click to expand...
Liberal Elites exist just as neocons exist. Just accept that fact and move on. Neither side is going to call a truce in the labelling department.
 
Originally posted by: cwjerome
The day our courts start imposing foreign moods, fads and fashions on Americans is the day America dies, along with the last greatest hope for human civilization on earth. 🙁
Click to expand...
Agreed! No more "court-imposed" foreign fads (or, shudder, moods}, for me!

In fact, I'm taking my Sony walkman and getting in my Audi and going down to the local Thai restaurant for my America First! meeting. Just gotta' notify Butch and Billy Bob on my Samsung cell phone first. Because human civilization depends on an America First purity of boiled, unseasoned vegetables and Chevy Cavaliers!

What would our country be like without stalwart patriots like you, jerome? Why, there'd probably be Belgian inspired french fries in our fast food restaurants. That tube steak on a bun we all love so much might be called a Frankfurter and not a Cleveland!

There might be entire TV channels in some foreign language like, gasp, Spanish! An American movie icon like Quentin Taratino might be forced by the courts to make some kind of chop sockey homage flick like Kill Bill, against his patriotic will!

Our nation's largest retailer might get most of the goods it sells from someplace like China. And Communist China and Japan might be buying the bulk of the US treasury notes that prop up our foreign spending spree!

Yup, we might be inundated by court imposed Mexican restaurants! Damn it, people wouldn't flock to IKEA if it weren't for activist judges and their insidious liberal agenda!

Just curious, cw. Flip that rant enabling keyboard you bang out your well tempered political and social insights on? What part of Wisconsin was it made in?


 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: cwjerome
The day our courts start imposing foreign moods, fads and fashions on Americans is the day America dies, along with the last greatest hope for human civilization on earth. 🙁
Click to expand...
Agreed! No more "court-imposed" foreign fads (or, shudder, moods}, for me!

In fact, I'm taking my Sony walkman and getting in my Audi and going down to the local Thai restaurant for my America First! meeting. Just gotta' notify Butch and Billy Bob on my Samsung cell phone first. Because human civilization depends on an America First purity of boiled, unseasoned vegetables and Chevy Cavaliers!

What would our country be like without stalwart patriots like you, jerome? Why, there'd probably be Belgian inspired french fries in our fast food restaurants. That tube steak on a bun we all love so much might be called a Frankfurter and not a Cleveland!

There might be entire TV channels in some foreign language like, gasp, Spanish! An American movie icon like Quentin Taratino might be forced by the courts to make some kind of chop sockey homage flick like Kill Bill, against his patriotic will!

Our nation's largest retailer might get most of the goods it sells from someplace like China. And Communist China and Japan might be buying the bulk of the US treasury notes that prop up our foreign spending spree!

Yup, we might be inundated by court imposed Mexican restaurants! Damn it, people wouldn't flock to IKEA if it weren't for activist judges and their insidious liberal agenda!

Just curious, cw. Flip that rant enabling keyboard you bang out your well tempered political and social insights on? What part of Wisconsin was it made in?
Click to expand...

Zing! 😀
 
:cookie: Perknose... you missed the mark by a mile....

I'm confident that many people can read my posts and figure out I'm not saying anything like what NeoV is rambling about. His is just a reactionary response that puts words into my mouth... lame. If he thinks my jist is "How dare anyone in the US think that the idea of working with other nations is a good thing?" than he's incapable of understanding my argument, let alone disagreeing with it.

 
Scalia, Breyer debate role of foreign law in rare appearance

Charles Lane
Washington Post
Jan. 14, 2005 12:00 AM

WASHINGTON - Leaning forward pugnaciously in his yellow armchair, Justice Antonin Scalia declared his eternal resistance to the arguments of his liberal colleague on the Supreme Court, Stephen Breyer.

"He will never convert me," Scalia declared, not that anyone familiar with his conservative record on the court ever doubted that.

But what was somewhat unexpected about Scalia's pronouncement was the setting: It was not the court's conference room, which is off-limits to everyone but the nine justices. Nor was it the courtroom, where Scalia and Breyer sometimes exchange indirect gibes but where the audience is limited to those spectators lucky enough to get in, because the court bars TV cameras.

Rather, it was a classroom at the American University Washington College of Law, where, for 90 remarkable minutes Thursday, Breyer and Scalia argued legal issues in front of professors and students and a national television audience watching on C-SPAN. It was the first time in recent memory that two sitting justices representing opposing factions on the court took their disagreements so public, and the effect was, at times, electrifying.

The subject, whether the Supreme Court should consult the opinions of foreign courts in making its own interpretations of the U.S. Constitution, is a hot topic in constitutional law circles. But it was almost overshadowed by the spectacle of two legal heavyweights engaged in a sharp but civil intellectual slugfest.

The two men were a study not only in contrasting legal philosophies, but also in contrasting personal styles. Scalia was characteristically intense, frequently shifting to the edge of his seat and punctuating his thoughts with brisk gesticulations. Breyer was all professorial cool, relaxing back into his easy chair and sipping spring water from a long-stemmed glass.

Neither justice really conceded any ground to the other, but in one sense Scalia had made a concession simply by appearing. Though he has been on television in the past, he generally avoids cameras, barring them from speeches he makes at law schools and public-policy groups around the country.

But apparently the topic of Thursday's debate, billed by its co-sponsors, the law school and the U.S. Association of Constitutional Law, as a "conversation," prompted Scalia to adopt, at least for a day, the same pro-camera policy that Breyer has long followed with respect to his speeches.

The court has made use of foreign legal opinion to bolster its rulings in two major recent opinions, its 2002 decision to abolish the death penalty for the moderately mentally retarded and its 2003 decision to abolish state laws against private consensual sex between same-sex adults. Foreign views of the death penalty are expected to play a major role in a case the court is still working on this term, Roper vs. Simmons, in which the issue is whether U.S. states may continue to sentence juvenile offenders to death, a practice all but abandoned in the rest of the world.

----------------------------------------------------------

As I said, "The day our courts start imposing foreign moods, fads and fashions on Americans is the day America dies, along with the last greatest hope for human civilization on earth. When the decisions of foreign courts and the views of international organizations decide American disputes or determine the constitutionality of our laws comes, the Liberal Elites will have successfully......"

Breyer is a longtime elite. On ABC's This Week he said the big challenge for the future will be "whether our Constitution fits and how it fits into the governing documents of other nations." I'm sure when he hobnobs with fellow elites at cocktail parties he get approving nods, but to most of us there's some very disturbing implications... namely, that our democratic process is subverted if our courts interpret American laws so they better mesh with the views of other countries.

Anyone who thinks judicial activism is a thorn had better realize this is a machete. When Justice Anthony Kennedy cites as "significant" a decision of the European Court of Human Rights while delivering the majority opinion in Lawrence vs Texas, Scalia rightly blew a gasket over the Court's reliance on the reasoning of a foreign court to decide the constitutionality of an American law.

The Council of Europe, meetings like the UN's Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects (July 2001), and countless NGOs constantly poke their nose into American life and law, continually trying to extend their agenda over the American citizens. The Elite power grab knows no limits.
 
i think it's something that can be fixed. it can be better, and do what it's supposed to do. we (all member states) need to clean house and change how it works.

btw i am a liberal.
 
I assume you're referring to the Constitution. If so, I agree nothing's perfect and appreciate the amendment process... but I do believe it's the best thing going in the world.

Regardless, the main issue is not how great the Constitution is, but rather the undemocratic and unjust manner people are willing to take to change this country on their terms. The whole reason for 1776 was because a bunch of far-off, unelected, unaccountable snobs were trying to dictate over us. Like I said, it's the reverse-Revolution, a long process of stealth meddling leading to a fait accompli.
 
Interesting to note that in the recent US Supreme Court decision regarding the death penalty for people under age 18, Justice Kennedy explained at length his rational, and a large part of it dealt with global sentiment and international trends and "laws."

It's one thing to be turning from a representative government to rule by an oligarchy of judges... but combine that with 'international influence' and we have a recipe for poison.
 
Originally posted by: cwjerome
There are those in the United States that just adore the United Nations, with all its ?consensus-building? and ?multilateral initiatives.? Most of all they love how the UN is the only body that can really tell America what to do. This is because in the Liberal Elite?s eyes, the UN is the only legitimate authority in the world, and the eeeevil US is a rogue nation that needs to be brought into line.

To most people, the fairly dysfunctional UN is a moderately useful debating club that can somewhat help problem areas of the world out. But to the elites, the UN?s main and most important function is to control America. You have to understand how the elite?s think: Their veiled anti-Americanism and not-so-implicit bigotry towards ?Joe six-pack? (ie. the unwashed masses, the stupids who live in the ?dumbfvckistan? red states) promotes an ideology that thinks the whole consent-of-the-governed stuff is obsolete. 😕

Most Americans still believe being governed by our own elected officials is a GOOD thing? the fact the we elect them is the source of their legitimacy. The UN is an unelected body full of anti-America international elites and nondemocratic countries. It is not an institution created by ?or for- the American people, it is not recognized by our Constitution, and to most normal people it has no legitimacy in telling America what to do. The Liberal Elite gameplan to subvert U.S. laws and authority to better mesh with the ?more enlightened? views (note: see ?Liberal Elite love of Old Europe?) of other countries, just doesn?t tickle the average American?s fancy.

Remember, the elites know their views aren?t succeeding at the ballot boxes, so besides calling the majority of Americans idiots, they must also do anything they can to go over our heads? namely judicial activism and increasing the role of international agencies like the UN. Foreign policy-wise, the elites are trying to make it so the United States could do little internationally (and even domestically) without first clearing it with our ?partners?? a codeword for our international elite friends.

The day our courts start imposing foreign moods, fads and fashions on Americans is the day America dies, along with the last greatest hope for human civilization on earth. When the decisions of foreign courts and the views of international organizations decide American disputes or determine the constitutionality of our laws comes, the Liberal Elites will have successfully ?reigned? in America?s evilness? and the backwards Anti-American Revolution will be complete. 🙁
Click to expand...

Wow, what a messed up a telling post from a true Elitist Republican. So many things wrong cannot even begin to correct. So sad.

You've got one thing right. America is dying because of people that make posts like this.

 
I would have more respect for the UN if it didn't have Syria on its security council. Also why is China a permanent member when Japan and India are not? What is the UN doing in Congo?

Rwanda? Miserable failure, in part due to pressure from the French on their secret activities there.

Sudan? Miserable falure, in part due to pressure from the Arab countries who are supportive of the racist, murderous regime that is commiting genocide against blacks in Darfur and other parts of the country.

The UN "peacekeepers" are known as being extremely corrupt and they rape women, regularly. These so-called peacekeepers have a horrendous track record and whereever they go, chaos, murder and looting takes place. On the Lebanese border with Israel, a Hezbollah flag flies next to a UN flag. What kind of message does that send?

I don't know what the UN is there for if it cannot even manage its own personal failues let alone manage any sort of order anywhere in the world. Its a corrupt organization from top to bottom. Scandals everywhere. Kofi personally took part in the oil-for-fools scandal, and let his son, Kojo, off the hook.

It just occupies a fancy building in NYC and debates endlessly. And I have not even mentioned its notorious anti-USA and anti-Israel stance. It only acknowledged the Holocaust recently.
 
if the the euros are really serious about the eu, they should give up their separate seats and votes on the security council and such orgs.
 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
if the the euros are really serious about the eu, they should give up their separate seats and votes on the security council and such orgs.
Click to expand...

one step at a time

 
Originally posted by: raildogg
I would have more respect for the UN if it didn't have Syria on its security council. Also why is China a permanent member when Japan and India are not? What is the UN doing in Congo?

Rwanda? Miserable failure, in part due to pressure from the French on their secret activities there.

Sudan? Miserable falure, in part due to pressure from the Arab countries who are supportive of the racist, murderous regime that is commiting genocide against blacks in Darfur and other parts of the country.

The UN "peacekeepers" are known as being extremely corrupt and they rape women, regularly. These so-called peacekeepers have a horrendous track record and whereever they go, chaos, murder and looting takes place. On the Lebanese border with Israel, a Hezbollah flag flies next to a UN flag. What kind of message does that send?

I don't know what the UN is there for if it cannot even manage its own personal failues let alone manage any sort of order anywhere in the world. Its a corrupt organization from top to bottom. Scandals everywhere. Kofi personally took part in the oil-for-fools scandal, and let his son, Kojo, off the hook.

It just occupies a fancy building in NYC and debates endlessly. And I have not even mentioned its notorious anti-USA and anti-Israel stance. It only acknowledged the Holocaust recently.
Click to expand...

raildogg.... learn ...... leeeeeaaaaaarn
 
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Condor, elite status -as I use it- is definately mainly a state of mind, and has very little to do economic status. The UN is a joke to many people, but because of the elite's love for it as a tool for subordinating American power and ideas, there can be no meaningful structural reform for the failed organization.

The recent bit of elitism, accidentally slipped for all to hear by that sniveling UN bureaucrat from Norway, is just another blade of elitist grass in a prairie of UN arrogance. Instead of uniting and gathering courage and support, the stuffed suit has the gall to criticize the entity that had helped the most up until that point. Instead of helping to spearhead aid and build-up hopes and efforts, he choose to let his elite ideology TEAR-DOWN. The worst part of course is the remark that the United States would have more money to help if it had higher taxes. Thanks for the political scolding on low taxes sir, and I'm sure being the good elite you're extremely magmanimous with other people's money, but try not to use this tragedy to promote your silly little elite ideology.

By the way, "Team America" is some funny sh*t... 😉
Click to expand...

Funny, and aptly sums up your World view. Magmammmiooosmamoosmoosmoos.

 
The UN did such a good job with the oil-for-food program. . .

The UN is just full of a bunch of crooks who are interested in themselves.
 
Who are these "Elites" of whom you speak? They aren't the guys who are always foiled by Lara Croft, are they?
 
Nope Kibbo, keep guessing (or just read what I've already posted)

The UN Elites and their supporters in America know they cannot get what they want from the American people, and so they are continuously trying to subvert the people's will and US Constitution through international tomfoolery. As John Foster Dulles said in 1952, "Under our Constitution, treaties become the supreme law of the land. They are indeed more supreme than ordinary laws, for congressional laws are invalid if they do not conform to the Constitution, whereas treaty laws can override the Constitution." There is no doubt that global bureaucrats are always trying to exploit this "loophole."

The problem is the UN and its corollaries are not accountable, and worse, are full of other nations whose own interests run counter to America's. The UN itself is diametrically opposed to the founding documents and traditions of the United States. It is clear to anyone with historical knowledge that the intent of the Founding Fathers was to keep the US government committed to Americans, not play the patsy to a cabal of international thugs, morons, and whiners. But this is what's happening today... we are slowly being disemboweled by the whims and desires of people who owe the American people nothing, and usually seek to limit and/or harm them.
 
Originally posted by: cwjerome
Nope Kibbo, keep guessing (or just read what I've already posted)

The UN Elites and their supporters in America know they cannot get what they want from the American people, and so they are continuously trying to subvert the people's will and US Constitution through international tomfoolery. As John Foster Dulles said in 1952, "Under our Constitution, treaties become the supreme law of the land. They are indeed more supreme than ordinary laws, for congressional laws are invalid if they do not conform to the Constitution, whereas treaty laws can override the Constitution." There is no doubt that global bureaucrats are always trying to exploit this "loophole."

The problem is the UN and its corollaries are not accountable, and worse, are full of other nations whose own interests run counter to America's. The UN itself is diametrically opposed to the founding documents and traditions of the United States. It is clear to anyone with historical knowledge that the intent of the Founding Fathers was to keep the US government committed to Americans, not play the patsy to a cabal of international thugs, morons, and whiners. But this is what's happening today... we are slowly being disemboweled by the whims and desires of people who owe the American people nothing, and usually seek to limit and/or harm them.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but are you talking about the Bush administration?

When has the UN tried to harm America? You sound like one of those whiney, suburban metal kids who gets mad when someone tells him something he doesn't like (which is pretty much what France and Germany did). They didn't even put sanctions on us when we invaded Iraq.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top