Posted on 11/30/2004 9:00:41 PM PST by FairOpinion
Of course not, I know that argument like the back of my hand. Calm down.
Reading the whole article to the end, I saw that what was released was primarily a serious critique of the UN itself. This is an august panel of diplomats. Just because the UN itself is corrupt, doesn't mean that no body formed in connection with the UN can produce legitimate international recommendations.
Let me connect the dots more explicitly. Part of the findings of this panel is that the UN had no definition of terrorism, and no meaningful approach to stopping genocide. A more effective UN, one could argue, would have approached Iraq differently from the beginning, avoiding the situation where the coalition had to schism off of the UN.
As a matter of fact, I did miss that little tidbit. I acknowledge that this was intended from the start to go against the coalition, which I think did the right thing while the UN was absolutely corrupt and wrong. I still maintain there is something of value in the panel's recommendations that the UN create a definition of terrorism and so on.
It is like the 9/11 commission. There was egregious politicization, and it's recommendations are not made of gold by any stretch, but yet the 9/11 report does have some meaning and merit.
not sure that is true, they are afraid we will change their countries in the way we see fit and know we have the power to do so. the un can make a useful podium to broadcast our policy of freedom and democracy to the world. we need to be pointing out they problems and corruption as much as possible not only in the un, but the governments they represent also, if we dont put freedom first we will have more war. we can apply tremendous pressure and should the state department needs a tune-up.
we let it go along with the cia and fbi during the clinton years, because "the threat was over" not true and now we must be vigilant and get our house in order
You have a very expectant and somewhat childish idealistic view of the U.N's potential.
Not since it's inception has it ever saved a country, stopped a war, saved a life for very long or promoted anything but lip service.
It is what it is. A useless jobs program that people who believe as you do continue to enable.
We have groups of Nation States that have effective uses, such as NATO. But none of these groups has this broad unrealistic goal of promoting peace through talking about it.
This idealism is just a bunch of crap.
Let the embassies deal with peaceful talk. Let the trading coalitions deal with trade and the benefits thereof, let the charities feed the hungry and let the military enforce the peace between nations.
The U.N. is feckless, corrupt and paralyzed by socialists who believe that we can just all get along by osmosis.
These are things they say, but they do nothing. They can't and will never come to consensus on anything, because they have misunderstood the tennants of Democracy.
One person, one vote, or one country, one vote works no better in the U.N. than it does in practice at the state level. What always happens is that the weaker and poorer demand and expect a portion of the stronger and richer's possessions. They then use their vote to get it, one way or the other. Even if it means hurting the people they are there to help.
In some ways, the U.N. is a perfect example of why the more pure forms of Democracy are flawed.
I am thankful our founders saw fit to establish us as a Republic. They left the purer Democratic methodology to the smaller groups at the local level and merged it into a Republic at the top.
This way, we have a form of Democracy that works well and allows the government the latitude it needs to govern effectively and not be bogged down by the personal needs and desires of the individuals that comprise it.
I don't think we can fix the U.N. unless it's mandate were reduced in size to more specific tasks, and the power structure of it were changed to exclude has beens like France, who no longer are true powers and vote always to hurt those that are out of pure debauchery.
If the membership were paired down by creating a "Associate member" status without voting power and leave the voting to those who fund the organization at a high level and eliminating the desires and needs of all the participants from the equation.
Then perhaps, I might give them one more chance to prove hey are worth a plug nickel,
As it stands now, they are worthless, perhaps even dangerous to world peace and security by prolonging conflict resolution by putting their own needs and desires ahead of all else.
Hey=they (in the last paragraph.)
lol childlike you are funny. childlike is taking your toys and going home in the heat of battle. that is what you are proposing. as is the un has only the value of another form of media or stage. needs to be cleaned as does some of our governmental agencies, ie the cia and state department. some of our enemies have taken political control of it, and therefore they are spewing out a bunch of anti-american garbage. we need to reassert ourselves politically through the department of state, this is their job, powell was a failure there, hopefully condi can do a better job. powell is a great general and a lousy diplomat. we are doing a poor job of getting our message out there right now, particularly to europe. although we might be able to fight the whole world, with a little finnish we wont have to. at the state department, we need leadership and a stong clear message that blasts like a mcdonalds ad for all the world to see. that ad should state american stands for the people, and for freedom and democracy. and if you are on the side of freedom you are on the side of america.
Hey Koffee .. how's that investigation into the OFF Scam the UN pulled off
You know .. the one where hundreds of thousand of Iraqis were starved or killed because of your Greed
Hey Koffee .. your days as head of the UN are numbered
our policy as expressed out to the people of the world through debate can help enhance our security. power through the worlds finest military, dominance through convincing the rest of the worlds people that america stands freedom and the advancement of democracy on every corner of the earth. the un is one forum for getting the message out. they would like to be a world government but will never be, just a place to meet a send out competing messages. the failure of the league of nations and if the un ultimately is liquidated will be in the attempt to enforce anything through it when the members dont share a common idealogy
Man! Does ANYTHING but corrupt, incompetent, backward, turd-world hogwash EVER come out of the U.N.?
NOooooo.....the ONLY effective body is one that operates in the way the US does where freedom and liberty are of utmost importance.....not the socialistic prima dona's who think they know what is BEST. America (if it can remain NON-socialistic) is the MODEL and SAVIOR to the world, NO OTHER BODY or "coalition" is set up to avoid the power hungry .....which is what is the problem from any organization LIKE the UN.....that they just figured out that there was "no meaningful way to prevent genocide" is the perfect definition of their uselessness, now or in the future.
For your information, the United Nations is EVIL, not just incompetent.
The possible ramifications of "recommendations" such as this from a "panel" will have, as their ultimate concequences, whatever degree of capitulation they see from the United States.
Therefore; we must watch our own government very carefully for signs of cooperation with the Evil Ones.
The only realistic way to deal with the U.N. is to withhold funding, troops, and completely withdraw our "membership".
Maybe. I only hold that international cooperation is important. To the extent that the UN has a task to facilitate that, it has non-zero non-evil purpose.
The ONLY effective body is one that operates in the way the US does where freedom and liberty are of utmost importance.....not the socialistic prima dona's who think they know what is BEST. -goodnesswins
There should be such a body, but it will need to earn legitimacy among some nations that are currently socialistic.
As to my comment about "childlike", I also qualified that remark with the word "Idealism", which describes your thoughts to a tee.
Only a Idealist, (a disease usually confined to the young) would look at the inner workings of the U.N. and say we can fix it if we just try harder!
That is pure nonsense.
We cannot, because we do not have the power within the organization to do it.
We may be the most powerful country on the planet, but within the U.N. we have no more power than France in theory, and in reality substantially less.
We cannot, by ourselves or even with the help of Tony Blair's government, make any substantive changes in U.N. operations and unfortunately we will never be able to do so in the current or foreseeable future.
Your views are indeed stemming from a liberal gubermint education in international politics that have always ignored reality. They live in a dream world!
The U.N. has but one fix, and that is complete dissolution of all and a subsequent total face lift and new charter, scope and oversight. A charter that will allow for a more Republican form of operational control to eliminate political paralysis. And oversight to combat the fraud.
Anything else is a total waste of money and time.
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.