Posted on 01/06/2017 8:57:07 PM PST by VitacoreVision
I’ve been barking up this tree for decades.
Trump..here is my plan
Let the U.N. do a go around of their rules by putting obama in as head of it.
Then take our money away
Then withdraw
Been saying this for a very long time: “GET US OUT OF UN!!” Now my Congressman and my Senator will hear me loud and clear. WILL YOURS?
The bureaucrats in our government will be only too happy to continue with UM plans all on their own. Agenda 21 comes to mind.
And theyre off,...... The race hae begun.
I tend toward your position here. We can at least stop funding it.
I doubt a direct exit would work, as it has too much political support by liberals.
So a better way to start is to encourage Beijing and Moscow to build their own UN headquarters, then to propose that the UN move to one, then to the other, in a rotation cycle. Being out of the US for 50 years would give us a lot of time to figure out how to leave. And there would be far fewer supporters in the US after a while.
If it was still untenable after 50 years, we could propose that India and some cities in Africa and South America could also host.
yefragetuwrabrumuy: I doubt a direct exit would work, as it has too much political support by liberals.The GOP controls the House, Senate, and White House. Plus the President-elect is negative toward the UN. Perfect time.
I agree. I’d recommend reducing our fees each year, enough to make the U.N. sit up and think.
That premise runs into trouble if China decides to jump in and fill the gap we’ve created by doing so.
I agree, but there gain, if China decides to up it’s contributions to curry favor, it can eliminate the shortfall we sought to create.
Yes it was the pres__ent _resident. The citizen do not agree.
Obama will go away as more and more he is ignored and belittled by people who think for themselves.
He’ll radicalize himself into oblivion > IMO.
I don’t want the UN setting up on another nation’s soil doing the same things.
It has to die.
If everyone saw it that way, I would agree. They don’t.
I think the U.N. needs to be outed for what it has been involved in.
It will take a campaign to de-legitimize it to the point our goals can be reached.
So I agree with you, we need to maintain our veto until the UN is meaningless.
Thanks. I appreciate the thought...
Direct *anything* is likely to fail in Washington, not just because of vested interests, but because the entire system was created for just the purpose of defeating direct actions.
The founding fathers were no dummies. They knew that popular ideas are fleeting, and political power is, and should be, tenuous. Their emphasis was not to stop brilliant masterstrokes, but horrific disasters; and they were well aware that a good idea today can quickly become a pestilence tomorrow.
This means that they set up a system it which change ideally cannot be ramrodded, but must survive through a gauntlet of challenges.
But this also means that the public has to be patient, because while they might want a dictator or king, this is the path to misery. The public wants simple solutions to complex problems, to hack the Gordian knot apart with the sword instead of methodically untying it.
So often the best route is an indirect one, to seemingly support something while undermining it. The Mexican wall is a great example: some of its biggest and loudest advocates actually made huge barriers to stop it from happening. Their excuses were legion. They even tried to lead the charge to doing nothing while seeming to be doing something.
Likewise, cagey politicians often decry things they fully support. The Clintons bitterly complained about “Republican corruption”, for example.
In any event, back to the problem of getting rid of the UN.
The opponents to this are both the internationalist socialists, and the multinational corporatists of both parties. Together they are a formidable opposition.
This is why I proposed the Beijing and Moscow UN headquarters. Both groups would foolishly think that it would advance their rather nasty anti-American agendas. This is a consequence of their elitist ignorance of both Beijing and Moscow. For a wealthy elite, only the best parts of both cities are known to them.
They have no idea what would happen if the ignorant, violent and primitive UN general assembly was dumped there. Many of them would be in jail faster than their diplomatic immunity could be ignored. In Beijing, they would quickly incite tremendous moral outrage with their rotten behavior. The average Chinese hasn’t felt such xenophobia since the Boxer Rebellion.
In short, it would be hilarious. After a few years of this, it would be much easier for the US to leave.
Give up a veto on all these other assholes? Why do that? We leave and the framework still exists for the UN to do terrible things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.