This is not The Haters Club You're Looking For discussion

note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
23 views
I hate how we still support the UN

Comments Showing 1-19 of 19 (19 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill So, the UN is about to launch an investigation into xenophobia / islamophobia and racism in the US. Any coincidence that it's an election year?

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.


message 2: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill Rusty...unfortunately that is pretty much the predetermined outcome. Just thinking about it makes me want to hack a furball the size of Keith Olbermann's ego.


Reads with Scotch I think we should really consider pulling funding for the U.N. completely, I have never seen a worthless money pit the size of the U.N. Do they have one single success? I can not think of one that has held up to the test of time. That says a lot since it is a fairly new organization. The U.N. has never functioned properly, and I don't think it ever will. We should cut funding and spend the moneys on something productive like... alternate energy research, cancer research, anything really instead of pissing it against the euro love fest wall.


Reads with Scotch What have they accomplished Donna? Really. I see them sitting on their hands a lot. I see them sucking the bucks, but I am not seeing anything else.


Reads with Scotch Nobel Peace Prize is worthless now... they will give it to just about anybody who has a popular idea. It may have still held some merit in the 80's

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.



message 6: by Dave (new)

Dave Russell Yeah, Donna, I agree with Nick. Other than all those things you listed what has the UN ever done for people? Nothing.


message 7: by Dave (new)

Dave Russell Well Nick asked "do they have one single success?" and you come back with all this research (good work, BTW) and all he can say is well we can do all those things without the UN. Yeah lets gets all the countries of the world together and start an organization to do all those things. We can call it the Allied Countries.


message 8: by Lori (new)

Lori I'd say we can't do all that research without the UN. But I would agree at peacekeeping the UN doesn't accomplish much, and has no power. Still, I think we should have gone there before shocking and awing Iraq. It's important that we remember there's a world out there.

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


message 9: by Dave (last edited May 22, 2008 08:50PM) (new)

Dave Russell Lori, yeah, there's no organization to protect us from the Romulans.



message 10: by Lori (new)

Lori Well, seeeeee, we better get it together before they come!


message 11: by Rusty (new)

Rusty (rustyshackleford) | 2198 comments Romulans nothing - my biggest fear is still the cylons.


message 12: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill Donna...yer first post spoke of goals and ideals. Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize...so did Arafat. So much for that. The IAEA is perhaps the biggest international laughing stock since Food For Oil..another UN fiasco which just may rank as the world's largest money scam. It's way past time we get beyond "meaning well" and get to actually "doing good". Let's not forget also that UN peacekeepers have allowed the killing fields of Ruanda and Bosnia, not to mention the child prostitution rackets in Africa. The UN is dirty up to it's eyeballs. And now, the majority of its members are not democracies. This is the harvest of multiculturalism...where all nations are equal, only because they are nations. Looks a little sucky to me.


message 13: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill To follow up...and not just to pad...but Donna mentioned earlier we do need a place where FREE nations can come together to vent differences, because free nations will always need such and she is most correct. The UN has failed by every measure. At first it meant well, but Western sloth allowed the current rot to take hold. The League of Nations passed on, and now so must the UN. Time to start anew...with the League of Democracies.


message 14: by Lori (new)

Lori If you serious, NB, about starting anew, then I'd agree with you since it sounds like you do think a place for countries to vent and resolve is important.

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.


message 15: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill ...was referring to your post #8, Donna. As I mentioned earlier, I agree with your statement on the necessity of nations having a voice. My point is that that voice carries responsibilities to the good of the greater community of nations. Moral equivalence is an absolute cancer on the world body. We absolutely need to be able to define what represents a decent governing body, and call out for all to hear that which is not. Recall my original post...look at who is heading up Durban II. Demonstrate to me or anyone else that those nations have earned the right to do so...or were they simply appointed by an NGO with a particular agenda?


Reads with Scotch I didn't say anything about abolishing it Donna; I just don't think America should foot the bill. Particularly with the amount of American bashing that goes on in the U.N. Fine you want to bash America then do it on Euros’ not Dollars.

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.



message 17: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill Lori... I mention the League of Democracies. Notice, it's no longer the League of Nations,or United Nations. Simply being a "nation" is no longer enough. A state must hold itself to certain ideals in order to belong to the world community. Despite what many may say....we DO have the moral authority - in conjuction with our sister democracies - to declare as such. Surely, Durban II is proof of this need.


message 18: by Lori (new)

Lori And you think with only democracies corruption and moral rot won't set in? It's a fine idea, and yes, I agree with you in principal. But the US is democratic, and there's plenty of greed and rot going on here.

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...


message 19: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill Biggest dick? Your Freudian slip is showing. You can do better than that, besides Chavez is already screeching at the top of of his lungs..big whoop. NATO served its purpose. The Fulda Gap is no longer a concern, and we should immediately begin a massive withdrawal of our troops currently stationed in Europe. It would quickly serve to have the EU get its own house in order and free up additional troops for the real war already underway.


back to top
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.