This is not The Haters Club You're Looking For discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
I hate how we still support the UN
date
newest »





W.H.O. I can live with giving them funds as well.
IAEA has no teeth and one can barely call them successful.
It would be cheaper to fund these programs independently. Correct me if I am wrong here but we cover the bulk of the U.N.'s operating cost, and I don't think we are getting much bang for our buck. The U.N. is supposed to be about peace, not curing the woes of the world. Don't get me wrong, I am all for helping out, but to dump money into the U.N. No there is a more efficient and cost effective way to make moneys available for those causes.



The UN could have been like The Federation in Star Trek. I still have hopes for some organization like that.



And yet...you say the UN died because of Western rot. You can't move away from your problems, they will follow you. Just so, the reasons for the weakness of the current organization need to be resolved.
But is it human nature? Politics and military allies don't allow for a neutral perspective. And instead of moving towards a unified world, it seems that the world is cracking into tribes once again. Except the multi-national corporations. It's so much more economic than it was when the League and the UN were formed.


Can I have the web address where you learned the U.N. Peacekeepers were successful 2 out of 3 times That just seems completely false. They do a show of force, but every bad guy out there learned long ago that the U.N. peacekeepers will do everything in their power not to use their weapons including watching innocent people get slaughtered. But they can pat each other on the back and say that they "tried" to help.
Dave, and Whoever else has a problem with me not wanting to fund this shindig, here it is, The U.N. does not function in the scope that it was intended to. Some projects have a good foundation, but it is a dirty corrupted organization, and even a broken clock is right 2 times a day. That doesn't mean you dump money on it.
Why do we need in Org. to aid foreign countries dealing with disasters? We had all kinds of aid standing by ready to go in. I don't think the U.N. Called President Bush and told him to do that.
Having a forum to discuss differences is what the U.N. is "SUPPOSE" to be. (This doesn’t mean that a nation should be expected to keep “discussing” when the other is aggressive.) But that is not what it is.


Then you know there will be an Axis of Evil formal organization, with Chavez screeching at the top of his lungs!
Gah. It will become a dangerous vicious killer game of color war. Cause that's how mature many leaders are. Basically who has the biggest dick.
Nato is kind of a League of Democracies...

This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Yes...let's talk about racism and xenophobia for a minute. Right now, we have:
1) Myanmar sentencing tens of thousands of its own people to a slow death rather than let in dirty foreign aid. Ditto China.
2) There are no churches, synogogues, Buddhist temples in Saudi Arabia
3) Throughout Muslim Africa and Pakistan, Christian girls are routinely kdinapped, forcibly converted to islam and married off against their will
5) Zimbabwe's overtly racist land redistribution program has just now pushed its inflation rate to 1 million percent!
4) Just today saw that the South African army is mobilizing due to out of control, xenophobic rioting which has resulted in scores of deaths
5)..and all of this against the backdrop of the UN's Durban II Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerence in South Africa, headed up by Libya, Cuba, and Iran. The first in 2001 proved so racist, so anti-semitic that this year Britain, France, Israel, Canada, and the US have all stated they have absolutely no intention of attending.
Kumbaya my arse.