Yet Another Reason to Hate the UN

I am sick of the basturds at the UN mouthing of and me paying their bills.

I am really angry to find out that they have been squandering my grandchildren's future earnings on dishonest companies in the food for oil program. My tax dollars have been pissed away by the UN before in numerous turd-holes around the world only to end up in the Swiss bank accounts of individuals. Why, why does my country continue to pay these people and their disreputable firms? Why don't we just stop paying for the printing, the translators, the housing, revoke the diplomatic passports, and send the worthless basturds out of New York? Toronto is a cosmopolitan city in a cosmopolitan country; why don't they take them. They are morally superior, right?

You mean companies like Haliburton.

What is worse is that food meant for starving Iraqi children never got there. These countries like France, Germany, and Russia sat on their high moral horse in opposing the latest action in Iraq all the while lining their pockets at the expense of starving Iraqi children. It’s no wonder they opposed the war, why stop a good thing of billions of dollars rolling into the coffers when it’s only a few dead Iraqi children that pay the price. This in combination with the secret oil stipend bribes to these same countries and secret and illegal weapons deals to Saddam should be an international outrage.

Now to add further outrage to what the UN stands for they elect Sudan a member of the human rights council. The US ambassador was the only one in the UN who walked out when Sudan was appointed, this is because of the ethnic cleansing that is currently going on in Sudan. Once again the UN is dropping the ball on yet another massacre and is doing nothing just like Rwanda. The same UN who sits and condemns the US for going into Iraq sits around and watches genocide and the murder of millions occur in countries like Rwanda and Sudan. The UN is a total joke, it should be bulldozed and moved to a more “worthy” location like France.

X

Move over League of Nations, make room for the UN.

Oh dear, the right-wing xenophobic grumblers are back in town ... and they've found a new tune.
Thank fook for ignore :)

Yip. It's a simple world. The only reason France and Germany objected to the Iraq invasion was for their own selfish needs.... not that they saw this whole mess coming (like pretty much every other country that objected to the invasion). It's all so obvious to me now.

Quote:

---

I am sick of the basturds at the UN mouthing of and me paying their bills.

I am really angry to find out that they have been squandering my grandchildren's future earnings on dishonest companies in the food for oil program. My tax dollars have been pissed away by the UN before in numerous turd-holes around the world only to end up in the Swiss bank accounts of individuals. Why, why does my country continue to pay these people and their disreputable firms? Why don't we just stop paying for the printing, the translators, the housing, revoke the diplomatic passports, and send the worthless basturds out of New York? Toronto is a cosmopolitan city in a cosmopolitan country; why don't they take them. They are morally superior, right?

---

Piney, Quit cryin'. :cry:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Yip. It's a simple world. The only reason France and Germany objected to the Iraq invasion was for their own selfish needs.... not that they saw this whole mess coming (like pretty much every other country that objected to the invasion). It's all so obvious to me now.

---

So you are saying a countries own personal interests in an issue play no important role as to how they deal with it? It’s already a proven fact that certain countries and individuals were bribed by Saddam’s Iraq for their support, and that certain countries stood to gain substantial financial benefits from Saddam staying in power. Why do you think France and Russia were not on board for the 1st Gulf War until it was guaranteed that Saddam would not be removed from power but only removed from Kuwait?

You are right in one thing this is not a simple world and there are other reasons for the opposition to the current conflict in Iraq, but generally if you look back in history to how countries act in certain situations you will find that they always act in their own self interests. France, Russia, and Germany had substantial financial benefits to gain from Saddam staying in power, why would they want to stop the gravy train?

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wally Pipp
Oh dear, the right-wing xenophobic grumblers are back in town ... and they've found a new tune.
Thank fook for ignore :)

---

Why is it not OK to criticize the UN and other nations that are involved in such scandals? Corruption is corruption no matter what nation you are from, I honestly don’t know why the UN or other nations should be immune to criticism.

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
So you are saying a countries own personal interests in an issue play no important role as to how they deal with it? It’s already a proven fact that certain countries and individuals were bribed by Saddam’s Iraq for their support, and that certain countries stood to gain substantial financial benefits from Saddam staying in power. Why do you think France and Russia were not on board for the 1st Gulf War until it was guaranteed that Saddam would not be removed from power but only removed from Kuwait?

You are right in one thing this is not a simple world and there are other reasons for the opposition to the current conflict in Iraq, but generally if you look back in history to how countries act in certain situations you will find that they always act in their own self interests. France, Russia, and Germany had substantial financial benefits to gain from Saddam staying in power, why would they want to stop the gravy train?

X

---

Oh, I agree that it may have played some factor in their choices, but I doubt if it was the over-riding decision. Germany repeatedly said that they would join in if the US could prove that the WMD existed, something they repeatedly failed to do. Of course, this is all conveniently ignored by the people who try to paint France and Germany as the bad guys for actually trying to save American lives by trying to stop this mess.

You are right though all nations do get influenced by greed. It'd be interesting to know how much securing all the oil in Iraq played a part in the UK/US decision to take over the country...... they don't seem very interested in dictators without any oil...

All else aside, I highly doubt France and Germanys decisions were based on their desire to "save American lives".

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
All else aside, I highly doubt France and Germanys decisions were based on their desire to "save American lives".

---

Really? Why? One of the major reasons I was against the war was because I thought (correctly it turns out) that a lot of innocent people on both sides would die. Do you think the French/Germans are some sort of monsters who do not have compassion for their fellow man?

I've never seen either country claim that concern as a reason they are against the war. All I've seen is the resulting political implications in the entire mid east. Not a mention of their concern for American lives, that's why. That may have been a reason you were/are against it, but I wasn't talking about why you were/are against it. Doesn't really matter anyway, we're there, that's that.

In yesterday's Investor's Business Daily there was a write-up about finding not only serin artillery shells, but also mustard loaded shells in Iraq. Apparently, they were rigged for use as booby traps or land mines. The paper also complained that they were one of the few, limited circulation media outlets carrying the report. So, there were at least some remnants of a WMD program in that country. They also indicated that Jordan had intercepted some foolish Syrians trying to blow up a serin device in a city, and that, if they had been successful, as many as 80,000 people could have died. Apparently, the source of the serin nerve agent was Iraq (although I don't know how they figured that out).

Although it has a bias (like all news sources), it is not a xenophobic rag.

And actually, I do think the French are some kind of monsters.:afrog:

The Investors Business Daily? What the hell is a paper with a name like that doing reporting on WMD in Iraq? Sounds dubious, anyways. Everyone knows that Iraq had WMD, but considering the joyous folks over there now, if they have them anywhere, we would have seen graphic examples by now. Nothing like a suicide serrin bomber to liven up the news. I guess I'd have to say that I'm skeptical, even though it is plausible.

Anybody who thinks that countries act in their own best interest should read The March of Folly by Barbara Tuchman. We often forget that it is not a country making a decision, but a person or small group of people. The folks on this forum are a bit above average in IQ, we all still do stupid things.

We can talk all day about all the reasons we went to war in Iraq. The bottom line is that it was because of the strengths and weaknesses of a few people in the Bush administration. Exactly who and how much, we probably can't know, but we can be certain that they each brought their own opinions, biases, and blindspots. The sum of all those is what we are seeing now.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PineyWoodsJimbo
In yesterday's Investor's Business Daily there was a write-up about finding not only serin artillery shells, but also mustard loaded shells in Iraq. Apparently, they were rigged for use as booby traps or land mines. The paper also complained that they were one of the few, limited circulation media outlets carrying the report. So, there were at least some remnants of a WMD program in that country. They also indicated that Jordan had intercepted some foolish Syrians trying to blow up a serin device in a city, and that, if they had been successful, as many as 80,000 people could have died. Apparently, the source of the serin nerve agent was Iraq (although I don't know how they figured that out).

Although it has a bias (like all news sources), it is not a xenophobic rag.

And actually, I do think the French are some kind of monsters.:afrog:

---

This report was all over the BBC when it broke, but within hours they changed it to point out that the serin artillery shell was about 20 years old and the guy who had rigged it as a bomb obviously didn't know it was a serin shell as he had rigged it to explode (which of course it wouldn't do not containing any explosives).

you all hate the UN for many reasons, but i'll give you the simplest one: the UN is calling all over the world in equality in dealing with people, while in the UN association there is unequality when the UN gives 5 countries the right of "vito" without giving this right to the other countries.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by beros87
you all hate the UN for many reasons, but i'll give you the simplest one: the UN is calling all over the world in equality in dealing with people, while in the UN association there is unequality when the UN gives 5 countries the right of "vito" without giving this right to the other countries.

---

You make it sound like it has some Italian connection LOL. It's "veto".

Going by the same selfishness principles, I don't think the big five in the UN will let the UN be scrapped and another body take its place, because they won't have a veto in that new body.

.

Bring back 'The League of Nations' ?

:rolleyes:

We need to work with what we have now, but man it need work(UN)!

Use the nuclear deterrent; that way we can all start again from amoeba - and perhaps get it right.

by the words of einstein. if the third war is innuclear weapons, the forth would be in sticks and stones
no one would want that, would we?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by yrwyddfa
Use the nuclear deterrent; that way we can all start again from amoeba - and perhaps get it right.

---

One good asteroid will have the same affect!

at least an asteroid is a natural disaster not caused by humans to kill humans

RE. Ameoba

If we can somehow impart the virtues of Object Orientated programming (oop) into the DNA of Ameoba early on, then we might have a more peaceful and logical evolution and might grow into a species that doesn't blow itself to bits at the first opportunity.

PS. Can someone explain to me what "Right-wing" and "Left-wing" mean please. I assume it has something to do with politics :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wossname

PS. Can someone explain to me what "Right-wing" and "Left-wing" mean please. I assume it has something to do with politics :lol:

---

It's from the countries that only have two political parties. Not exactly what I'd call a democracy, but they seem happy with it ;)

So its a case of the left wing not knowing what the right wing is doing! Seems like in Britain the right wing has a pretty hazy notion as well.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by beros87
at least an asteroid is a natural disaster not caused by humans to kill humans

---

So right!
One day the Earth will get a wake up call!
Hope I am alive to see it!

The 'problem' with the asteroid scenario is that


(i) It will hit the North Atlantic near the United States; fortunately it will not affect the rest of the world - I've seen it on the telly. we will all wonder why the largest single entity on the Earth, the pacific ocean, fails to get hit every time.
(ii) Liv Tyler will lose her dad; I do not want to see Liv Tyler crying. Bruce Willis is compelled to become an international hero; even though will all know that the irritating git Ben Affleck should really be the one to go.
(iii) Morgan Freeman will tell people to carry on paying their bills; yeah right!
(iv) We have to dig lots of caves (as clearly when 16 miles of rock hit the earth there will be no geological impact - it will only mean big waves, and bad weather)

(v) Evey child in the world will have a space shuttle toy.
(vi) I read Moby Dick once and it was **** then; I do not want some ageing space cowboy to read it to me again - I will of course be on the mission to save the United States err I mean the Earth.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by yrwyddfa
The 'problem' with the asteroid scenario is that

---

Not the only kind of wake up call!

We can construct a really large radio-alarm clock at put it in orbit (or even on the moon) When it's time to wake up we could get it blast sound waves at the earth . . . .

(But then we'd need a pot of tea big enough to satisfy 6 billion people - perhaps a little tricky) . . .

How about Independence Day for movies, if you like them to relate to.

asteroids and aliens. hmmm

We'd need to ensure that the aliens can understand terrestial machines code first - otherwise we'd never be able to compile a virus.

And we need to ensure that MIT are up2date with alien technology.

But hey; it's do-able.

man, you all have a very big imagination
write a book or something, and maybe it will be a movie some day:D :D :wave:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Why is it not OK to criticize the UN and other nations that are involved in such scandals? Corruption is corruption no matter what nation you are from, I honestly don’t know why the UN or other nations should be immune to criticism.

X

---

...which is a nice little jusitfication for your continuous admonishment of the UN and those countries who did not back the war.

Godamn right wing hooligans - you should all taste your own medicine....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
It's from the countries that only have two political parties. Not exactly what I'd call a democracy, but they seem happy with it ;)

---

It has nothing to do, Portugal have dozens of parties and still some are left, some right and some "middle" wing. I cant say which kind of parties are left or right because I dont know lol but I know that wings have nothing to do with countries only having 2 parties

Quote:

---

Originally posted by PT Exorcist
It has nothing to do, Portugal have dozens of parties and still some are left, some right and some "middle" wing. I cant say which kind of parties are left or right because I dont know lol but I know that wings have nothing to do with countries only having 2 parties

---

How do you define politics as a sliding linear scale.

For example what if a party supports very relaxed immigration laws and also thinks that young offenders should be beheaded. Where do they fit on the scale? It's all too confusing to me :confused: