What's exactly wrong with honeybee?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Memnoch1207
2) When has a country ever aided another country without a motive? Every country has an agenda when it comes to assisting other countries.

---

Er, I can think of a number of instances when Canada has helped other countries without any (apparent) agenda or "spending restraints".

Don't tar other countries with the same brush as Bush's selfish behaviour. Face facts, the US has a great many things to be proud of, it's just that helping other countries isn't one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Memnoch1207
.....

If there were oil in africa, the UN and every other country in the world would have stepped in to stop the genocide that has been going on there for decades.

The UN hasn't done a damn thing to help any situation. They think their mere presence is enough to calm a rebellion or stop a country in the midst of genocide.....

---

The UN has repeatedly said that it is not meant to be a world police force or dictator. It is a forum for countries to discuss and agree on a course of action.

Do you people want the UN to be some sort of world government? If so, I'm sure you'd be the first complaining when the UN starts telling US troops what to do. Much as I think it was a daft move for the US/UK/Aus to go into Iraq without the agreement of the UN, I think this is a preferrable state of affairs to a world where the UN would be able to boss countries around.

If the UN had as much power as some people here seem to think it should have, then what would stop the UN ordering al of the US troops to serve in war torn Africa. When the body bags start coming home, how happy would you be that you're the UN's *****? Not very, and that in turn would rip the UN apart.

Really, It's farcical to blame the worlds problems on the UN.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
The UN has repeatedly said that it is not meant to be a world police force or dictator. It is a forum for countries to discuss and agree on a course of action.

Do you people want the UN to be some sort of world government? If so, I'm sure you'd be the first complaining when the UN starts telling US troops what to do. Much as I think it was a daft move for the US/UK/Aus to go into Iraq without the agreement of the UN, I think this is a preferrable state of affairs to a world where the UN would be able to boss countries around.

If the UN had as much power as some people here seem to think it should have, then what would stop the UN ordering al of the US troops to serve in war torn Africa. When the body bags start coming home, how happy would you be that you're the UN's *****? Not very, and that in turn would rip the UN apart.

Really, It's farcical to blame the worlds problems on the UN.

---

It's not that the UN should boss other countires around, but it should help the contries take agreements everyone can agree to, maybe through a democratic vote, maybe not - the fact is, this has worked rather well for a long time now, and by the US bypassing this 'forum' as you said, just shows they can do whatever they want, whenever they want - and they do it, that's really the scary part.To be very extreme I could say that the US is the worlds biggest terrorist, they often ***** things up... though terrorists are usually better at planning :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Er, I can think of a number of instances when Canada has helped other countries without any (apparent) agenda or "spending restraints".

Don't tar other countries with the same brush as Bush's selfish behaviour. Face facts, the US has a great many things to be proud of, it's just that helping other countries isn't one of them.

---

Come on you know that statement is totally false. The US is always the first one there to help out its just never reported widely because who wants to hear good news? Saying the US doesn’t help out other countries is an insult. You just have to take a look at all of the food, medicine, and monetary aide that has been given to other countries that has suffered tragedies and hardships.

The same attitude was seen at the AIDS conference when everyone was complaining about how the US is not doing enough to combat the world AIDS problem. When truth be told that the US spends more on AIDS than all other countries in the world combined. Yeah the US doesn't care.

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Come on you know that statement is totally false. The US is always the first one there to help out its just never reported widely because who wants to hear good news? Saying the US doesn’t help out other countries is an insult. You just have to take a look at all of the food, medicine, and monetary aide that has been given to other countries that has suffered tragedies and hardships.

The same attitude was seen at the AIDS conference when everyone was complaining about how the US is not doing enough to combat the world AIDS problem. When truth be told that the US spends more on AIDS than all other countries in the world combined. Yeah the US doesn't care.

X

---

The US is also one of the richest countries in the world, and wether you like it or not, their military budget is bigger than the humanitarian one - what a nice message for the worlds biggest power to send.

Quote:

---

Don't tar other countries with the same brush as Bush's selfish behaviour. Face facts, the US has a great many things to be proud of, it's just that helping other countries isn't one of them.

---

What happened to that big ol' wall in Germany??

When there's an earthquake or other natural disaster in another country - who's the first to send supplies, search teams, and other aid? Even offered it to Iran recently.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Come on you know that statement is totally false. The US is always the first one there to help out its just never reported widely because who wants to hear good news? Saying the US doesn’t help out other countries is an insult. You just have to take a look at all of the food, medicine, and monetary aide that has been given to other countries that has suffered tragedies and hardships.

The same attitude was seen at the AIDS conference when everyone was complaining about how the US is not doing enough to combat the world AIDS problem. When truth be told that the US spends more on AIDS than all other countries in the world combined. Yeah the US doesn't care.

X

---

Really? It's funny, because a number of charities complain that the US humanitarian aid (from the government) almost always comes with "home spending" stipulations. i.e. 80% or so of the cash must be spent on US goods. So you have Aids drugs which cost a forune being bought in the US and shipped to Africa, rather than buying a generic locally.

Many charities (Christian based ones particularly) have strict stipulations about how the charity money is spent. (basically missionary work).

As for the US being first...... riiiiighhhhttt..

Don't get me wrong, I do believe that the US does help out, but I was directly repsonding to the statement that "all governments have selfish reasons for helping others." Which I see as totally false.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
When there's an earthquake or other natural disaster in another country - who's the first to send supplies, search teams, and other aid? Even offered it to Iran recently.

---

I know this. Britain :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
What happened to that big ol' wall in Germany??

---

Er, are you honestly saying that the US humanitarian effort is the reason the wall came down in Germany???? ha ha ha ha ha ha

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
When there's an earthquake or other natural disaster in another country - who's the first to send supplies, search teams, and other aid? Even offered it to Iran recently.

---

Somalia ? :afrog:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Er, are you honestly saying that the US humanitarian effort is the reason the wall came down in Germany???? ha ha ha ha ha ha

---

It's an example of "helping other countries", which is why I quoted your post that said that helping other countries is something the US cannot be proud of doing.

Here's some cold hard facts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/debt/Story...671171,00.html

Quote:

---

Just days before the summit, Mr Bush announced a $5bn (£3.6bn) package of help for the poorest countries spread over three years, while in Europe, finance ministers overcame opposition from the cash-strapped German government and pledged an increase in European aid of $7bn a year by 2006.
....
Campaigners point out that even assuming the US president manages to push his ambitious aid increases through Congress and that the EU succeeds in persuading aid laggards such as Italy and Greece to boost their budgets, the world's leading economies will still be spending far less on aid than the UN target of 0.7% of national income.

The US spends just 0.11% of national income on aid. The EU average is three times that, while Denmark spends 10 times as much as a proportion of national income.
......
Among the big donors, the US has the worst record for spending its aid budget on itself - 70% of its aid is spent on US goods and services. And more than half is spent in middle income countries in the Middle East. Only $3bn a year goes to South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
It's an example of "helping other countries", which is why I quoted your post that said that helping other countries is something the US cannot be proud of doing.

---

Really? Funny, 'cause I could have sworn that it was the Germans who tore the wall down.... of course, I suspect it may have been reported differently in the US..... :p

Look, Denmark kicks ass :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Really? Funny, 'cause I could have sworn that it was the Germans who tore the wall down.... of course, I suspect it may have been reported differently in the US..... :p

---

You've got to be kidding me?

It WAS the Germans who tore the wall down, like it or not - with help from a lot of other people. But yes, the US provided support to Berlin during the first 5 years after WW2, until it got totally closed up.

The US victory in the Cold War had nothing to do with the wall coming down I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
The US victory in the Cold War had nothing to do with the wall coming down I guess.

---

Interesting terminology. How do you think the USSR views the end of the cold war? I would argue that they see themselves as victors as well. By what measurement do you say you won?

But all of this is besides the point.... none of it is at all applicable to the US humanitarian efforts, the cold war was purely military.

I'm also sure the Germans loved the fact that Berlin was an occupied city right up until recently.... oh no, that's right, we were doing that for their own good weren't we :p

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Interesting terminology. How do you think the USSR views the end of the cold war?

---

Hmmm.
Well, since the USSR doesn't exist, and hasn't since the end of the cold war, I'd have to say they'd have no thoughts at all.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Something Else
Hmmm.
Well, since the USSR doesn't exist, and hasn't since the end of the cold war, I'd have to say they'd have no thoughts at all.

---

:thumb: :p Excellent point!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Don't get me wrong, I do believe that the US does help out, but I was directly repsonding to the statement that "all governments have selfish reasons for helping others." Which I see as totally false.

---

One can revise that statement to apply to all countries. All govenments have selfish reasons for helping others from time to time. I will have to agree that most countries do help out when they can for humanitarian reasons alone, not to get something out of it (selfish reasons).

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex-FB
Here's some cold hard facts.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/debt/Story...671171,00.html

---

That is fine if you were just talking about government aid. If you take into account all of the US based charitable organizations I do believe you will find the US and its people help the world out considerably. Plus there is more than one way of helping out besides monetary support, stationing troops to stabilize a country costs money as well.

X

what is this talk about countries and what they feel. A country is a piece of ground that peopel walk around on. It doesnt think, feel or do anything.

It is peope who decide to give aid and some will do it for the reason of helping others some for selfish reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
... stationing troops to stabilize a country costs money as well.

X

---

You forgot to mention that the country should be de-stabilized first, through sanctions and other means :p

Forget about the Berlin wall, just look at what the US is doing about the Israeli wall.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by davebat
what is this talk about countries and what they feel. A country is a piece of ground that peopel walk around on. It doesnt think, feel or do anything.

It is peope who decide to give aid and some will do it for the reason of helping others some for selfish reasons.

---

Like an object in VB has a standard method, so does a country, this is called a Government - and is called when the country is created, and assigned when only the countrys name is used.

Set USA = New Country(America)
USA = oEvil.Government

Therefore, everytime USA is referenced, one is talking about the government, like so:

Set GreatBritain = New Country(GB)
GreatBritain = USA

See? Now it all should make sence... If not I'm just stupid... or maybe it's 50/50... yeah... I could go with that...

the government is made of people like you and me, dont be fooled into thinking that they are a massive all powerful entity.

The US government is not responsible for the deaths of any IRAQs, the soldiers who fired the guns are. Every one has a choice, and no Government will ever take your freedom of will.

You see what im trying to say here?

That the government isn't made of Goo?

no, thats silly.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
You forgot to mention that the country should be de-stabilized first, through sanctions and other means :p

Forget about the Berlin wall, just look at what the US is doing about the Israeli wall.

.

---

Why should anyone care what Israel does in its own country? I still don’t understand the whole outrage over building a wall to keep terrorists out. Then again they have passed UN resolutions against Israel to keep them from having parades so it doesn’t surprise me.

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee
You forgot to mention that the country should be de-stabilized first, through sanctions and other means :p

Forget about the Berlin wall, just look at what the US is doing about the Israeli wall.

.

---

That's right, forgot about any positives and focus only on the negatives. That's one way to ensure the US is viewed as evil. Are you sure you're not in the media?

But since you brought it up...

Quote:

---

The United States has vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Israel's controversial West Bank barrier.

---

Quote:

---

US diplomats have argued that any resolution on the Middle East has to include a robust condemnation of the activities of Palestinian militant groups.

---

which it does not. I'd say, good call US.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Why should anyone care what Israel does in its own country? I still don’t understand the whole outrage over building a wall to keep terrorists out. Then again they have passed UN resolutions against Israel to keep them from having parades so it doesn’t surprise me.

X

---

Terrorists? A people thrown out of their own country because what a stupid book says, they have all right to be angry. I have nothing against the Israelian people, but what happened after WW2 just facking sucks!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by honeybee

Forget about the Berlin wall, just look at what the US is doing about the Israeli wall.

---

I rest my case.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by vbNeo
Terrorists? A people thrown out of their own country because what a stupid book says, they have all right to be angry. I have nothing against the Israelian people, but what happened after WW2 just facking sucks!

---

The area that is now Israel (/Jordan) belonged to the British before WWII, after the war because of the Holocaust and the death of 7 million Jews the newly formed UN developed a partition plan dividing Palestine into Jewish and Arab portions. This was done in 1947; all was well for a time as British troops were still in the area. After the British pulled out the surrounding Arab nations immediately attacked the newly formed Jewish state. The fighting went on for over a year but in the end Israel prevailed.

The formation of Israel had nothing to do with some “stupid book” as you put it; it had to do with the Holocaust and the slaughter of 7 million Jews in WWII and its Israeli people not “Israelian”. My advice to you is to read and learn more about this issue before completely forming your opinion about the subject.

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
The area that is now Israel (/Jordan) belonged to the British before WWII, after the war because of the Holocaust and the death of 7 million Jews the newly formed UN developed a partition plan dividing Palestine into Jewish and Arab portions. This was done in 1947; all was well for a time as British troops were still in the area. After the British pulled out the surrounding Arab nations immediately attacked the newly formed Jewish state. The fighting went on for over a year but in the end Israel prevailed.
X

---

And then down come the twin towers, you and i are on point. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by davebat
The US government is not responsible for the deaths of any IRAQs, the soldiers who fired the guns are. Every one has a choice, and no Government will ever take your freedom of will.

You see what im trying to say here?

---

That's pretty interesting :) Let me see... if that's how you are looking at things in Iraq, are you implying the soldiers made up their own minds to go to Iraq, topple Saddam Husseign and occupy Iraq? I was under the impression that every US (and other nations') soldier went to fight in Iraq because he/she received orders to that effect from his/her government. Which means to me that whatever happens in Iraq, the US government is responsible for it, not the foot soldiers fighting the war. If you really believe what you just said up there, you are a pathetic soul.

.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by demotivater
That's right, forgot about any positives and focus only on the negatives. That's one way to ensure the US is viewed as evil. Are you sure you're not in the media?

But since you brought it up...




which it does not. I'd say, good call US.

---

And what would you call the approach where you only talk about the so-called positives (I mean we should really consider what was the US contribution in bringing down the Berlin wall :p) and keep everyone in the dark about the negatives? Perhaps the US foreign policy?

The fact is there are just a couple of nations in the whole of the UN which think the barrier is justified, one of them unfortunately being the US which enjoys a veto power. I don't need to elaborate about the model of democracy the US follows internationally.

As for what Israel does in its own country, it's not the US business either, is it? Then why does the US collaborate with Israel over military equipment? Why does it always save their ass in the UN over whatever damning thing they may have done?

Maybe if the US neighboured Israel instead of Palestine, and when the Israeli gunships entered your land illegally and started killing off those whom they deemed terrorists, you would try to think of human rights and self protection and all that junk. Who cares about Palestine because they don't have oil.

.

What are you guys all talking about, everything bad in the world is obviously the cause of some reptillian species from outer space that took away our "psychic" powers and made us talk.

On a side note, I can't believe I spent that much time of my life reading that thing mendhak has at his website...

If you don't know what I am referring to, thank <INSERT YOUR FAVORITE RELIGOUS FIGURE> that you do not.

Quote:

---

The fact is there are just a couple of nations in the whole of the UN which think the barrier is justified, one of them unfortunately being the US which enjoys a veto power. I don't need to elaborate about the model of democracy the US follows internationally.

---

Actually if memory serves me I believe the US has been trying to get Israel to stop building the wall. But that still doesn’t answer the question of why the UN is paying such huge attention to a nation building a wall in its own territory. Yes the US has veto power much the same way France and Russia vetoed any action in Iraq to take down their buddy Saddam so their Oil for Food scam, drilling rights, and illegal weapon sales wouldn’t be disrupted.

Quote:

---

As for what Israel does in its own country, it's not the US business either, is it? Then why does the US collaborate with Israel over military equipment? Why does it always save their ass in the UN over whatever damning thing they may have done?

---

Like I said the US is asking Israel to stop building it that seems in line with what you want no? Israel buys its military gear from whoever offers them a good deal they have military hardware from Europe and across the world not just from the US. If the UN paid closer attention to the real atrocities going on in the world like what is currently going on in the Sudan where hundreds of thousands are dying instead of if Israel is building a stupid wall maybe the world would be better off.

Quote:

---

Maybe if the US neighboured Israel instead of Palestine, and when the Israeli gunships entered your land illegally and started killing off those whom they deemed terrorists, you would try to think of human rights and self protection and all that junk. Who cares about Palestine because they don't have oil.

---

Kind of like how your country enters Kashmir? Oh wait you said that belongs to India, much the same way the so called “occupied territory” belongs to Israel. Maybe the UN should be passing more resolutions against India over Kashmir huh?

X

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Actually if memory serves me I believe the US has been trying to get Israel to stop building the wall. But that still doesn’t answer the question of why the UN is paying such huge attention to a nation building a wall in its own territory. Yes the US has veto power much the same way France and Russia vetoed any action in Iraq to take down their buddy Saddam so their Oil for Food scam, drilling rights, and illegal weapon sales wouldn’t be disrupted.

---

The US hasn't really been trying very hard. They constantly scupper condemnation by tying in seperate clauses that they know the Palestinians won't agree to. It's petty. These clauses could easily be raised as a seperate vote (the condemnation of Hammas). I think that France was wrong to threaten to use it's veto with Iraq, and I think the US are wrong to use it with regards to Isreal. The best thing to do would be to remove the power of veto from all countries that it applies to. But of course, that would be a more democratic solution, and I'm sure the bigboys wouldn't want to give up their ball.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Like I said the US is asking Israel to stop building it that seems in line with what you want no? Israel buys its military gear from whoever offers them a good deal they have military hardware from Europe and across the world not just from the US.

---

Yes, because the US are renown for selling it's latest technology to who-ever asks them. I hear Pakistan wants to buy some Apache's.

http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/...ael050602.html

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
If the UN paid closer attention to the real atrocities going on in the world like what is currently going on in the Sudan where hundreds of thousands are dying instead of if Israel is building a stupid wall maybe the world would be better off.

---

The UN do seem quite interested in the Sudan. But it's back to the whole, "they're not the worlds policemen" scenario. As for the second part of the comment, I bet you wouldn't think it was such a small deal if you lived there. Just because there's another more serious problem in the world, does that mean we shouldn't strive to find a solution to other problems at the same time?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Xanith
Kind of like how your country enters Kashmir? Oh wait you said that belongs to India, much the same way the so called “occupied territory” belongs to Israel. Maybe the UN should be passing more resolutions against India over Kashmir huh?

---

There appears to be progress between India and Pakistan on this issue without outside help. There appears to be no such progress in the middle east from either side. Something needs to be done (I don't know what - much smarter people than me have failed to come up with a solution). I'm pretty sure the land grab isn't going to help the situation.