Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: hail to the chief
Of course!

I see. You want the UN to have an army under UN command.

I suggest to you that, if the UN was capable of enforcing resolutions against one state, it would seek to be capable of enforcing those same resolutions against ANY state, including the USA.

No thanks. I'm happier with it as a debating society. Giving an inherently corrupt organization more power is not a good idea. There is no such thing as recourse with a global government.

24 posted on 09/24/2005 11:54:49 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Carry_Okie

It is irrelevant whether the UN has command of an army. Clearly they would never use military force to back up their resolutions. What I was referring to was the lack of willingness on the part of the nations involved to act for their own good, instead of waiting for permission from such an inept organization. If nobody takes action, this resolution may as well not exist. The mullahs don't care about resolutions from the UN; if they were interested in our opinions, they wouldn't be building weapons to attack us in the first place.


34 posted on 09/24/2005 3:51:11 PM PDT by hail to the chief (Use your conservatism liberally)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson