What to do about the UN

Accuracy in Media ^ | 04/03/2003 | William R Alford

[walford]

In word and deed the Left continues to demonstrate a sincere conviction that George W. Bush represents a substantially greater threat to their interests than does Saddam Hussein. Prior to the current conflict the Iraqi dictator had merely caused the death of thousands in two regional wars, killed thousands more of his own people by means of torture, summary executions and poison gas, and torched over 600 oil wells. Apparently, such atrocities are far more acceptable than the President of the United States having the temerity of subjecting his foreign policy to Congressional approval rather than that of the UN.

[walford]

This is a considerably revised version of an earlier article that has finally been posted by editors at AIM.

[RetiredArmy]

NUKE IT!

[najida]

Oh no!

The NYFD needs practice burns. Now, to be really snarky, we just don't let France, Germany etc know about it.

[lilylangtree]

Considering that Europe is demanding that UN be given control over post-war Iraq, I'd say put the UN in a closet and dropped out of sight. "Out of sight out of mind."

[11B3]

F the UN

Or just plain FUN for short.

[areafiftyone]

What To Do About The UN

What to do... what do do... what to do... FLUSH!!!

[BartMan1]

ping

[Fraulein]

U.S. Will Pay an Extra $100 Million in Increased UN Dues NEXT YEAR

[sonofatpatcher2]

I'll see what I can arrange.

I aim to please!

"Thanks, Scotty."

"My pleasure, son."

Want a break from war news? Go to the Stark Trek Freeper Post or the New Stark Trek Website for a laugh or two. Then come back refreshed and loaded for bear!

[ampat]

Either the UN show some backbone and do something for a change or think about what Henry Kissinger said; get out of the UN or dissolve the security council, and form a new organization of willing countries. (willing countries should have a record of accomplishment).

[Lee'sGhost]

Well, I'll run this pony out one more time.

After we quit the UN I say we create another world organizatin (not government) where only countries with elected forms of government are allowed to vote on anything -- and the sole objective of the organization is to work toward the end of all dictatorships, despots, etc.

[walford]

Thank you LG - we are definitely on the same page on this one. There is a need for an international organization, but only one composed of governments that are legitimized by a popular mandate.

The idea that it is possible to negotiate with a dictatorship assumes that there are common interests - there are none. There can be no peaceful coexistence, whether we cave into them or not.

[Lee'sGhost]

"There can be no peaceful coexistence . . ."

And by my estimation there shouldn't be coexistence.

[Darksheare]

Umm... kick them out of the US.
Declare them all PNG.
Raze the building and fumigate as well.
Build office space on top of the ruins.

[Enduring Freedom]

What to do with the UN?

Give it to France as a symbolic gesture.

Any guesses as to what the gesture symbolizes?

[Darksheare]

Building and all, reassemble it in Paris?

[Darksheare]

I have some guesses, but I'll be banned for voicing them.

[beavus]

Na na na na. Na na na na. Hey he-e-ey. Good-bye.

[Enduring Freedom]

It's kind of like the Statue of Liberty, in reverse.