Should the US pull out of UN?

[bayouwolf]

US= Police of the world
UN= Monday morning quarterbacks

You can't win a war that the other side is not participating in.

BUT...

We the people should not have to endure the constant bashing we get from other countries that we support financially and with a military presence. If it wasn't for our grandfathers most of the english speaking world would be speaking GERMAN instead.

[Raz_Kaz]

You can't wni a war based on lies while deceiving the world that your money hungry agenda is all in the name of freedom.

[thrasher]

Originally Posted by bayouwolf

We the people should not have to endure the constant bashing we get from other countries that we support financially and with a military presence. If it wasn't for our grandfathers most of the english speaking world would be speaking GERMAN instead.

Yes wh should. We the people have created a country that is hated and despised worldwide, so we deserve any spite that comes our way.

We (well not me, but a lot of people) helped to elect a president in the US that without hesitation violated international law by aggressively invading Afghanistan and especially Iraq. Bush and other US leaders are war crimnals under that same international law. What international law you say? Those of the UN. Funny thing is, we playes a large role in establishing those laws following WWII (think Nuremberg). Once those laws actually apply to us, who gives a crap what the UN thinks. Ahh, the hypocisy of the situation...beautiful.

So yes, the US should be kicked out of the UN or at least lose permanent securit council standing. And Bush, Rumsfeld, Franks, etc... should stand trial as war criminals.

[YogsVR4]

Originally Posted by RSX-S777

Truth be told, most Americans didn't give a fuck and a half about Rwanda and Sudan and any U.N. action/inaction in those countries before the organization condemned and criticized U.S. actions in Iraq. Now the atrocities in those countries are suddenly being used as a lame excuse as to why we should pull out by the most NOBLE citizens. Time to stop acting like babies- don't try to change the rules, criticize the referee or leave the game because it doesn't always go your way...

Are you really that shallow? The same people who don't give a fuck about those countries also don't give a fuck about the UN - either before or after the UNs criticism.

The UN has been a failure of near biblical proportions. They stand aside while hundreds of thousands are slaughtered. They send in troops who rape children. Their claim to fame is passing resolution after resolution that does nothing more then keep Xerox busy.

Its pathetic that anyone would stand behind this second go around of the League of Nations. Its structurally unsound and not a single one of the reforms its cheif fuckwit has offered will do anything to address it. Every single one of the reforms just adds to the bureaucracy. It could do nothing before - how in the hell is adding more going to turn this paper pushing, genocide watching, and cowardly bunch of political hacks into anything useful. It won't. Its dieing and it doesn't have the leadership or internal structure to save itself.

[Twitch1]

Yogs- i don't know about you but I've been hearing folks mentions how the UN is useless for decades- well before Rwanda. There is even and old saying from at least the late 1960s "Get US out of the UN."


For an organization like the UN to actually work all the players have to acknowledge that they'll play by the rules. Unfortunately those that conspire to commit genocide do not play by rules.

Those new to this controversay imagine incorrectly that the general feeling of uselessness of the UN by most people is linked to some current event when in truth I've heard the same basic "the UN sucks" for 40+ years.

In the other thread, Yogs, 100% of the people are concerned for one woman's welfare in most compassionate ways yet we're told that no one in the country cares about the Sudanese? Very sad, bitter and pessimistic point of view, huh?

Diversion from the point in an attempt to headline a totally unconnected agenda like Iraq is senseless.
The fact remains- what are they going to do about genocide in Sudan?

[RSX-S777]

Originally Posted by Twitch1

For an organization like the UN to actually work all the players have to acknowledge that they'll play by the rules.

^^^ABSOLUTELY! This is apparently far beyond the abilities of the Bush administration. Focusing solely on the failures of an organization in order to detract from and/or veil one's own shameful, illegal and unilateral agenda is the true diversion here...

And Yogs- you tell me U.N. peacekeepers are all rapists (a glaring generalization, by the way), I can counter with any number of appalling stories involving American soldiers. Choose any conflict you like.

You want to convince me the U.N. is cautious and cowardly. I say the U.S. is reckless and arrogant.

The U.N. "stands aside" and thousands are slaughtered while the U.S. invades at will and slaughters thousands.

Faults abound. Those in glass houses...

[DGB454]

Originally Posted by RSX-S777

Truth be told, most Americans didn't give a fuck and a half about Rwanda and Sudan

Truth be told, neither did anyone else in the world except those imediately affected.

[RSX-S777]

OK. Suddenly then, the issue that nobody in the world cared about (which is bullshit, by the way) is a very serious point of concern for the U.N. critics here. Why such an abrupt shift in interest? DGB- I didn't see you or any of the other Bush-backers wailing about the cruelties in question until AFTER the U.N. condemnation of the war. Nobody was here demanding U.S. and U.N. intervention or carping about their impotence in those countries until AFTER their condemnation of the Bush administration's actions. It's a completely transparent and ridiculous effort. Some people are far better at making excuses than contributing or, god forbid, admitting fault. The U.S., a country where the sun gloriously shines out of the almighty President's ass, couldn't possibly be wrong in action or principle- let's blame the U.N., eh?

[Twitch1]

ANother thought on the purpose of the UN- back in the 50s we all saw it as a confusing contradiction of the job that the Red Cross does. The UN horned into the food and medicine distribution business that the Red Cross was already in. Any reference to them actually doing anything substantial as a "peace-keeping force" was never taken seriously by the public at the time. Until the end of the Sovs as a military power no one could picture UN guys doing much of anything against them to "keep them in line" at all. The height of the Cold War was quite a different time than today, of course.

[YogsVR4]

I never said everyone in the UN were rapist nor did I imply that they were. They did send troops to the Congo. They raped the women and set up a pedophile ring. What has the UN done to redress the issue? Holy cow! They had resolution and we all know what those mean.

So far the best defense for the UN is that they make some of the same mistakes the US has. Wow - you guys are really making the case for how needed the UN is. There is not a single function that they accomplish that can't be done without the beuracracy they're perfecting to an art form.

RSX - you must have a hard-on for the President. You keep trying to relate your percieved failings of his administration to the how we view the UN. They are not related. It doesn't matter who the president is/was. Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Kennedy - it doesn't matter, the UN is a failure on its own.

I didn't see you or any of the other Bush-backers wailing about the cruelties in question until AFTER the U.N. condemnation of the war.

Your inability to read it doesn't make it true. I've been pointing out the failures of the UN for a couple decades (and since I've joined this board). Many others have as well. It seems that you just didn't notice until the UN's stance on Iraq coincided with your own.

[Twitch1]

Yogs- you know that about says it all. Every topic discussed here gets turned into something about Bush or something bad about America. I've begun ignoring certain people's posts since they are usually just "damn Bush" or some similar predictable substitute with no redeeming content whatsoever. Bush is responsible for everything bad that happens anywhere, huh?


Someone always horns in to hijack a topic and pervert the original theme as though all of the world's ills are traceable to 2 causes. It's just so transparent that it's nothing more than an agenda to perpetuate negativity for the sake of negativity with things US as the scapegoat. And of course vile language and name calling has to be used about Bush, Blair or whatever topic principal for the shock value since coherent verbal communication is beyond some that come here.

[fredjacksonsan]

Well, everything IS Bush's fault.










Isn't it?

[RSX-S777]

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

So far the best defense for the UN is that they make some of the same mistakes the US has. Wow - you guys are really making the case for how needed the UN is. There is not a single function that they accomplish that can't be done without the beuracracy they're perfecting to an art form.

So they make the same mistakes the U.S. does, but they certainly don't storm foriegn countries on a whim. What the U.N. symbolizes (faults and all), and what it means to cooperate with our world neighbors is something we should never toss aside. Bush is a fool for doing so. Anyone who believes as he does is being incredibly short-sighted.

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

RSX - you must have a hard-on for the President. You keep trying to relate your percieved failings of his administration to the how we view the UN. They are not related. It doesn't matter who the president is/was. Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Kennedy - it doesn't matter, the UN is a failure on its own.

I simply have an aversion to bullshit. To be fair, shouldn't I be the one asking why you all have a hard on for the man? Nothing is a failure if you're willing to work at it- and the U.S. is not- we want what we want when we want it. God help you if you get in our way. And I don't think it's out of line to think that the right is pissed because they percieve the U.N. as a roadblock. Turns out the U.N. was absolutely right when they rejected the idea of WMDs in Iraq. The U.S. was dead wrong. What's worse they were dead wrong in front of a world audience. Best way to save face is to deflect their own incompetence. Dare I suggest that the people who believe (as Bush does), that the U.N. should serve our agenda, are the same people who are constantly bitching when, historically, they fail to do so?

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

Your inability to read it doesn't make it true. I've been pointing out the failures of the UN for a couple decades (and since I've joined this board). Many others have as well. It seems that you just didn't notice until the UN's stance on Iraq coincided with your own.

I imagine you fall into the above-mentioned category. But more accurately, I didn't notice until certain members, who seem to take a sick pride in showing a complete disregard for the welfare and safety of non-Americans, suddenly became quite concerned about the goings-on in two African countries. Especially when the events in question can be used to back their viewpoint...

[DGB454]

Originally Posted by RSX-S777

OK. Suddenly then, the issue that nobody in the world cared about (which is bullshit, by the way)

Prove it. While you're at it prove that no one in the U.S. cares.

is a very serious point of concern for the U.N. critics here. Why such an abrupt shift in interest?

I don't critisize the UN. Frankly I don't care one way or the other about it.

DGB- I didn't see you or any of the other Bush-backers

You're barking up the wrong tree again. I'm not a Bush backer. I'm also not a US basher.

wailing about the cruelties in question until AFTER the U.N. condemnation of the war.

Wrong again. I don't think we should be in this war either.

Nobody was here demanding U.S. and U.N. intervention or carping about their impotence in those countries until AFTER their condemnation of the Bush administration's actions.

Again...I could care less about the UN or anything they collectively put out.

It's a completely transparent and ridiculous effort. Some people are far better at making excuses than contributing or, god forbid, admitting fault.

If you had your facts straight about the people you set out to try and belittle then I may be willing to admit fault. But as it stands I see no fault to admit to in any of my statements.

The U.S., a country where the sun gloriously shines out of the almighty President's ass, couldn't possibly be wrong in action or principle- let's blame the U.N., eh?

I'm not sure where you live (nor do I care) but from where I stand the sun gloriously shines down on this great country from the sky.
Blame the U.N.? Sure why not. Close them or keep them open makes no difference. They are of little use.

[RSX-S777]

You apparently care so little about anything that you feel compelled to argue everything...to the sentence fragment...