DescentBB

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147092,00.html

The U.N. has a Human Rights Commission and the countries of Cuba and Zimbabwe are on it. So is Saudi Arabia. Now this may be a bit confusing for those in Castro's political prisons and for those who have their property seized by Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. Also, the women of Saudi Arabia who pretty much can't do anything might be a little perplexed by the U.N. Human Rights Commission.

But we're not. We know it's ridiculous.

That's why the USA should just ignore or trample the "International Community". They're idiots!

Why does Texas breed so many mindless brutes?

kufyit wrote:Why does Texas breed so many mindless brutes?

Kuyfit shows a tendency for incorrect assumptions or a bad memory. I immigrated to the USA so I wasn't born in TX, but I got here as fast as I could! Try to do your homework before you shame yourself again.

Enough already. We (referring to 50% of this forum's readers) know the UN is useless and corrupt and needs to be abolished. But there are...those that don't see that for whatever reason.

Last time I checked, if you have a problem with your neighbour, you ask them over to have a chat about it. You most pointedly do NOT gather all your OTHER neighbours together (without the miscreant) to see what can be done.

Jebus H Chribt on a pony - and you wonder why America has gone from being the most favoured nation on Earth to the most hated? Well, now you know why!

Complete agreement with Kufyit and Mobius. Cheers.

So tell me Mobius, you and your fellow white New Zealander's have granted the Maori full sovereignty that the Maori's have been "chatting" about since the 60's? No? Then don't be busting America's chops.

The "international community" is a bunch of idiots, and the UN especially. But the first effort should still be to attempt to work with them. But once that attempt has been made, if a bunch of bribed nations and/or dictators disagree with you and refuse to work with you, you're not really obligated to listen to their demands.

Lothar wrote: The "international community" is a bunch of idiots, and the UN especially. But the first effort should still be to attempt to work with them. But once that attempt has been made, if a bunch of bribed nations and/or dictators disagree with you and refuse to work with you, you're not really obligated to listen to their demands.

It's made even worse because the UN was taking bribes from the Saddam regime from the "Oil-for-Food" scam. All that bribe money could've fixed a lot of sewers in Iraq.

How come when a few bad things happen in the UN the right wingers are calling for an end to the organization? It's not accurate to say that the entire system is flawed, that every member is corrupted, is it? Why are you guys so quick to dismiss the U.N. based on a few bad examples and not, say, corporate American capitalism?

kufyit wrote:How come when a few bad things happen in the UN the right wingers are calling for an end to the organization?

I love it... "a few bad things"... hahaha!

It's not accurate to say that the entire system is flawed, that every member is corrupted, is it?

It's not accurate to say every member is corrupted.

It is, however, accurate to say the entire system is flawed. In theory, it sounds nice -- you get all the governments of the world together talking. But when it comes to voting on resolutions... why is it that nations like Iran get a vote on anything? Why do unstable dictatorships get equal votes with democracies? Why do nations like Cuba end up chairing human rights committees? Where is the internal accountability?

Really, though, my post wasn't about the UN -- it was about the international community in general, and which nations we should listen to under what circumstances.

Lothar wrote:if a bunch of bribed nations and/or dictators disagree with you and refuse to work with you, you're not really obligated to listen to their demands.

The cold war is over, ergo the UN is broken.

the UN only existed as a cheaper alternative to a hot war between the US and the USSR, and that it did well.

With the demise of the USSR, you currently have a organization that was suppose to be a passive fuclrum between two powers, being yanked in 4 different directions that don't represent the majority of the world, nor is overly concerned about the safety of anyone.

it needs to be rebuilt from scratch, cause it can't learn from its mistakes.

heh@kufyit. The largest fraud scandal in history and this week a child sex ring and you consider those just a few bumps in the road?

kufyit wrote:...Why are you guys so quick to dismiss the U.N. based on a few bad examples and not, say, corporate American capitalism?

Do you attend a university or college and if so which one? I want to make sure my daughters don't apply there because if you're paying for that education you have been ripped off bigtime!

kufyit wrote:How come when a few bad things happen in the UN the right wingers are calling for an end to the organization? It's not accurate to say that the entire system is flawed, that every member is corrupted, is it? Why are you guys so quick to dismiss the U.N. based on a few bad examples and not, say, corporate American capitalism?

Why is it when Trent Lott made comments honoring a retiring Senator that the Libs labeled him a racist and demanded he (Lott) step down as majority leader in the Senate?

I'm not trying to minimize the failures of the UN, I am just drawing parallels. Obviously, the structure of the insitution allows for corruption, not unlike the design of the American (and general multi-national) corporate systems.

The problems are similar: the arrangement allows people to be unaccountable for their wrong-doings.

Let us not forget that it is the United States that made the UN. It is still the United States that essentially runs the UN. It is the responsibility of the United States, and other member nations, to address the UN's shortcomings.

I mean, seriously. I hear a lot of yapping, but I am not hearing any solutions. Are you guys seriously suggesting that we just dissolve the UN and leave no other forum for international dialogue? Most of the problems of the global community come from the fact that it exists in a state of anarchy. Shouldn't we try to remedy that?

Before you think about solutions, folks better decide what they want/need a UN for? As for accountability, there are some good corporate models of how that can be done. For example, put goals into a contract, mutually agreed upon. If, after some appropriate length of time, say annually, the contract specs are not met, figure out why. If the person in charge was an idiot, then fire the miscreant and find somebody else who can do the job. Oh gee, this is not a perfect system - well YEAH; since you have to run this show with people, you're bound to dredge up politics and some morons. Just expect it and you won't be disappointed.

Mobius wrote:Jebus H Chribt on a pony - and you wonder why America has gone from being the most favoured nation on Earth to the most hated? Well, now you know why!

You know, I typed up a pretty good rebuttal, but...



...I thought why waste a perfectly good opportunity. A picture is worth a thousand words.

kufyit wrote:How come when a few bad things happen in the UN the right wingers are calling for an end to the organization?

Because anyone who uses a computer has some understanding of math and therefore must realize it's more than "a few bad things" happening with the UN decade after decade.

It's not accurate to say that the entire system is flawed, that every member is corrupted, is it?

Funny, you came up with those words yourself. Heh, I didn't have to type them, sounds like the truth reveals itself.

Why are you guys so quick to dismiss the U.N. based on a few bad examples and not, say, corporate American capitalism?

One word: FREEDOM. Corporate American capitalism is voluntary. Taxpayer funds to the UN are not (and they come from other nation's taxpayers too but we shoulder too large a chunk). If I don't want to buy American then I don't pay for American products. If I dont' want to pay the UN, my tax dollars still go there.

kufyit wrote:Obviously, the structure of the insitution allows for corruption

Replace the crossed-out words with "encourages"...

kufyit wrote:The problems are similar: the arrangement allows people to be unaccountable for their wrong-doings.

One key difference between the two: in economic systems, usually once somebody is a known wrongdoer, they're not trusted with anything. A lot of times they get busted, but even when they don't, nobody is going to trust them with their money ever again. And if they do, the system needs changed (and I'll be the first to say it!)

Explain to me again: why can Cuba be on the human rights commission?

When Cuba (etc) got invited into the UN, it's not like we were in the dark about what they were like. When Iran is able to stay on the UN and keep putting forth resolutions condemning Israel for polluting Arab land with Jewish people, it's not like it's a first offense. There are significantly more dictatorships in the UN than democracies. It's not just a few bad apples, and it's not just nations being able to avoid being caught. We're talking about known human-rights violators that execute anyone who dares speak ill of their own leaders, but are still allowed to put forth UN resolutions that criticise the US for putting panties on some guy's head.

It is still the United States that essentially runs the UN. It is the responsibility of the United States, and other member nations, to address the UN's shortcomings.

Totally agreed. I think, though, the shortcomings are so fundamental that any "UN" that exists after the shortcomings have been addressed would have nothing in common with the current UN but the name. The best place to start addressing the shortcomings is to kick out basically every nation that doesn't have an elected government or isn't moving that way. Let them keep sending ambassadors, but don't give them votes and don't let them lead committees.

I hear a lot of yapping, but I am not hearing any solutions.

We're not here to give solutions, we're here to point out the problem. You can't solve a problem if people refuse to admit it exists.

Most of the problems of the global community come from the fact that it exists in a state of anarchy. Shouldn't we try to remedy that?

Uh, no...

Most of the problems of the global community come from the fact that a lot of screwed up nations that execute dissidents are able to band together and hold conferences on "human rights abuses" that focus 100% on Israel's wall. The problems come from the fact that nations like Iran and North Korea are allowed to chair discussions on human rights, democracy, etc. The problems come from the fact that a lot of completely f***ed up governments are being given a voice and given power to act on that voice. Saddam's Iraq was treated as a respected member of the world community, and many nations that are just as bad (like, the ones many on the left say should've been invaded before Iraq) still are.

Iran does not deserve a vote, or a shred of respect. So why is it that Iran gets a free pass from the UN, and Israel gets more criticism than the rest of the world combined? It's a fundamental flaw in the system.

edit: argh, I had my response going, and all of a sudden when I copied in a URL it posted. I'll redo later today after school...

i should run the world. i'd kick ass at that.

-SoniC

KlubMarcus wrote:

kufyit wrote:Why does Texas breed so many mindless brutes?

Kuyfit shows a tendency for incorrect assumptions or a bad memory. I immigrated to the USA so I wasn't born in TX, but I got here as fast as I could!

I have never heard a more persuasive argument for closing the boarders.

kufyit wrote:Why does Texas breed so many mindless brutes?

Stereotyping kicks ass.