Don't tell me you've fallen for this one. The US funds way less than its fair share of the UN. This is why wealthy American benefactors, such as Ted Turner, feel obliged to do some "topping up".Originally Posted by Winston001
Deus ex ukulele
Don't tell me you've fallen for this one. The US funds way less than its fair share of the UN. This is why wealthy American benefactors, such as Ted Turner, feel obliged to do some "topping up".
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
no more pies
Define fair share??? I would say with the manpower, the equipment, the humanitarian relief, and the money, the UN is over resourced and underpreforming.
The UN is the biggest letdown consuming the most resources that our planet can boast of. What a waste of time and money. Peacekeepers? how the hell does that work when they aren't allowed to interfere if rival factions should want to shoot each other?
The UN was a brilliant idea, that is now a toothless, money hungry behemoth of lard.
Opinion ventured
Boyd hh er Suzuki are my heroes!
The best deals, all the time!
Deus ex ukulele
And your original point about the US funding it was what, exactly?
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
no more pies
Sorry, can't claim that point in the first instance... It was winston I think...
The US is funding a good idea that is underperforming. If it was me, I would cut the losses, and continue to do what one could without aiding the UN anyway....
Boyd hh er Suzuki are my heroes!
The best deals, all the time!
Deus ex ukulele
You're right. I apologise.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
Hardcore Biker
This war has cost more than the US will possibly get back in oil. If they spent all that this war has cost them on oil exploration and reclaiming, oil prices would be far lower.
And this is a war - the first punch was thrown at the US. They learnt the hard way in WW2 that you can't ignore a war and hope it won't head your way. If the Iraqis had let the UN inspectors in where they wanted to go they would have known they didn't have any WOMD. They played the biggest bluff hand ever and it backfired on them. And anyone else who bluffs about Biological/Nuclear weapons is going to find the same thing.
Who would you rather have as a world superpower - Iran/Iraq - controlling the world through torture, human rights voilations opression. Or the US controlling the world through - Starbucks and McDonalds?
I love the smell of twin V16's in the morning..
Deus ex ukulele
I was nearly going to ignore this pile of crap, but have had a change of heart.
Regarding the cost of the war versus the cost of oil -- some facts to back up such an assertion would be valued.
Regarding the "war". Iraq did not throw the first punch. A bunch of terrorists non-aligned to any nation state did. The other excuses for the "war" perpetrated by the US Government are a crock. In fact they are lies. You should read more.
As for the Naomi Klein diatribe in your last paragraph -- it's hard to see Starbucks or McDonald's dominating the world's political agenda. It's funny how the "bad" multinationals always get caned as the devil's spawn but the good ones never rate a mention. And not all multinationals are American. You should read more.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
no more pies
Terrorist alignment is an interesting Topic!
Just because nation states don't proclaim terrorist agendas in policy, does not mean they are not aligned with the idealogy!
I would happily say that if you are unconcerned about terrorism, and if your country does not do all that is in its power to fight it, then said country is a supporter. Tactful denials aplenty, but where does the money trial go? The people that become the terrorists?
Boyd hh er Suzuki are my heroes!
The best deals, all the time!
unless you can prove it.
[FONT=Verdana]What utter arse biscuits.
I guess your simply referring to the fact that it hasn’t favoured the US in terms of agreeing to military action against 'rogue' nations over recent years, or the fact that as a Peacekeeping Organisation, not a military organisation like NATO, it would rather keep the peace. You appear to have fallen under the spell of the US propaganda trap me thinks.
The UN is not just about wars.
What about the humanitarian relief it renders?
Kids welfare charities?
Education programmes?
I have a sneaky suspicion the tens of millions of people that the UN help each year would say your talking absolute rubbish about the overall effectiveness of the UN my friend.
The UN is more than a military behemoth at the beck and call of the US, and it's only as powerful as its members (plural).
This weeks international insult is in Malayalam:
Thavalayolee
You Frog Fucker
no more pies
No I am simply reffering to the chats I have had with our soldiers who have served as peace keepers, who say effectively, they can't do anything. The only thing they are allowed to do is protect themselves, if they should be lucky enough to come under fire, and even then, they aren't allowed to chase down the antagonists...
I picked up a hitch hiker once, stoned off his face. This guy was such a drop kick it was unbelieveable, doing a political sciences degree, one aspiration in life? To go work for the UN and help out with world peace...
When I asked him if the UN was effective, he said, no, they are underfunded.
I asked him how much of the money his Cannibis Oil cost him would go towards world peace...
Problem is the losers like him of yesteryear, are the ones holding the strings of power now. Through our government, the UN, whatever.
Justice for the sake of justice, not pecuniary gain is what is needed.
And if people happen to be butchering other people in plain view, and the peacekeepers can't do anything about it, because of UN regulations?
That my friend, is bullshit in the highest order.
Boyd hh er Suzuki are my heroes!
The best deals, all the time!
Deus ex ukulele
Democratically elected and sovereign nations are entitled to some respect. And protection. Just because we may not agree with some of the things they do, should not give us carte blanche to invade and sort things out. If we have learned nothing else from history, that warning should be tatooed on our foreheads.
Otherwise the UN should have taken control of the US after that sham that saw George W Bush elected as president, largely on the whim of his brother, the Governor of Florida. And don't mention state-sanctioned executions...
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
no more pies
Can you imagine weedyboy in power though? two horse race maybe, but one of the horses was far less a candidate than the other.
The voting system, though strange (wonder what the rest of the world thinks of MMP) of the US, worked exactly as it was meant to in this case, and there aren't any strings to pull. It is a numbers game, pure and simple.
Personally I am not for the death penalty, and am quite interested in Restorative justice as a concept.
Soverign states, elected democracies, maybe, but who polices the police?
That is what the UN was intended to do!
It can't, it would need to be heavey handed for that to happen, but if it was to be heavy handed, it would breed a world dictator. Given the corruption they already suffer from, this is not what is needed...
The UN becoming word dictator will probably happen one day anyway...
It is the ultimate catch 22... At the moment, I am relatively satisfied the US is doing what it is doing with the interest of justice at heart, and the constitution garauntees against it happening willy nilly. If that changes all depends, if they get a whole bunch of left swinging Judges in the judiciary, they have shown they are more than happy to rewrite the law/see it in the light of whatever the heck they want to see it in.
Summary, we're all gonna die!! I just hope mine is old age, not psychotic governments.
Boyd hh er Suzuki are my heroes!
The best deals, all the time!
Hardcore Biker
Iraq brought all this on on themsleves. And a 173 billion dollars of oil exploration would go a long way. Iraq had links to the terrorist group involved, and if they had let the UN inspectors go where they wanted to instead of continually dicking them around the UN would never have allowed the US to attack Iraq.
Maybe you should stop reading so many conspiracy tales.
I love the smell of twin V16's in the morning..
Deus ex ukulele
There is no proof whatsoever that the Saddam Hussein regime had any links to Al Qaeda. Like "WMD" this is a US lie.
We now know that even if Iraq had let the IAEA inspectors go where they wanted, they wouldn't have found any nuclear weapons or components thereof. Kind of shows a perverse sense of humour on Iraq's part!
And the UN did not "allow" the US to attack Iraq. The US and its axis partners decided to do it anyway.
I agree that $173 billion (I presume US$) would buy a lot of oil exploration. But why this amount? And there is no guarantee that this exploration investment would find any oil.
I still think you should read more.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
Hardcore Biker
Well said - and thankfully in this Pacific Paradise, under a western government we can say what we like when we like, about anyone, without fear of being dragged off in the middle of the night for a good kicking, or worse...........
I love the smell of twin V16's in the morning..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks