Article

2004-11-20 International-UN-NGOs

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2004-11-20 10:08:05 AM|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The U.N. has as much relevance as the Student Council at your local High School. When the President of the Student Council has finally had ENOUGH, and takes the unanimous DEMANDS of the Student Council into the Principal's Office he (or she) is routinely greeted with: "Aren't you supposed to be in your Chemistry class now?"

Posted by Justrand 2004-11-20 10:58:23 AM|| 2004-11-20 10:58:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 How about just eliminating it? What would be different? As it stands now, the organization's primary purpose is to facilitate a transfer of wealth from the developed countries to the undeveloped ones. It has become polticized to the point of self-parody. The only way to effect change anywhere in the world is through the intervention of the US and whatever nations choose to ally themselves with her. UN actions without US forces result in, at best, incompetence and, at worst, chaos and genocide. The main function of the UN now is to provide France a platform on which to preen. The US could be just effective without the fig leaf of the UN.

Posted by RWV 2004-11-20 11:06:32 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:06:32 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 but Mike Sylwester assures us it works exactly as designed, just fine

Posted by Frank G 2004-11-20 11:17:03 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:17:03 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 I, for one, prefer an ineffective contemptible UN to an effective powerful one. Especially if we lose our veto, as Fred proposes, and have to live with the decisions made by third world dictators being paid off by French demagogues.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-11-20 11:30:45 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:30:45 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Justrand has no understanding of the uses of nuance. /JM mode

So why don't the French Act! Like a cheerLeaders? Go into the Principals (y0ur pals) office and fight off the Commie_Fascist block from East Head High? What's the bonus? Bacon! We will own the so called nation of Canada.

Posted by Shipman 2004-11-20 11:32:28 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:32:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Yeah, but the other part of my proposal is not to allow any nation with an information minister or a minister of religious affairs, or a head of state who wears epaulets to join.

Posted by Fred 2004-11-20 11:34:04 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:34:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 And if the predominant language is French?

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-11-20 11:39:29 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:39:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Start with hats. Funny hats. Turbans, brimless hats, Sikh stacks, Yassir maps, beware the Red Fez of Qazi. Weird people, crazy people, people with secrets, people with something to hide, wear hats. Funny hats = trouble. EG has a nice peaked cap, but the grandiosified epaulets give him away. Bad man. Hey, Bonnie Prince Charles got in trouble just the other day. Wore a funny hat. Q.E.D.

Other people can be bad, too, but those hat people - wooooooo. Watch out. No perm vetos for hat people.
;-)

Posted by .com 2004-11-20 11:44:54 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:44:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 You're right, again, .com. EG should be added to any post regarding the U. N.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2004-11-20 11:51:18 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:51:18 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 And Mrs D is onto another powerful indicator, too. Talk funny? Hit the road, Jack. Speak American or Ninja or dos Cokas con mucho hielo, por favor. If you haven't heard it in a Quentin Tarentino movie, forget it. Buzz off. No veto for you buddy.

We've been over this ground a coupla hunnert thousand times, at least. Let's meme it.

Posted by .com 2004-11-20 11:52:13 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:52:13 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 All this representation and veto stuff in the UN gives me a big case of the Yawns. I do not care how the furniture is arranged, the fundamental issue is sovereignty, and a Security Council's stamp does not make their actions any more legitimate. I am much more in favor of bilateral agreements. Look at the best environmental action the UN has come up with: Kyoto, basically a shell game. In the big picture, the UN is irrelavant.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2004-11-20 11:52:43 AM|| 2004-11-20 11:52:43 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 I don't care what they look like, what kinda hats they got, what kinda soil they live on, what manner of gods they may be beholding too, as long has they are born American (and they'll know it) we need to take 'em, or make room for them. Yes even unto Aris.

Posted by Shipman 2004-11-20 12:06:04 PM|| 2004-11-20 12:06:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Dang! Wronger thread for a Triumpiast Blaster.

Posted by Shipman 2004-11-20 12:07:30 PM|| 2004-11-20 12:07:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 I can't figure out what language .com and Shipman are speaking to each other on this thread. Could someone clue me in?

Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-11-20 12:23:45 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2004-11-20 12:23:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Whoa, hold on there Phil - I don't know WTF Ship is talking about either, lol! This is the norm as he seems to go into a sort of cryptic-mucky mode frequently. I surrender, heh.

I speaka the Engrish.

Posted by .com 2004-11-20 12:29:35 PM|| 2004-11-20 12:29:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Reforming the United Nations

A few JDAMs would reform it properly.

Posted by AzCat 2004-11-20 12:39:28 PM|| 2004-11-20 12:39:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Ima think Shipman feeln better

Posted by Frank G 2004-11-20 1:23:20 PM|| 2004-11-20 1:23:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Task: Reform UN.

Tools required:
1. 1 gallon unleaded gasoline.
2. 1 book of matches.

Instructions:
Attempt only when UN is in full session.

Posted by JerseyMike 2004-11-20 1:56:32 PM|| 2004-11-20 1:56:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Hell Yes Frank! My heart feels like an Aligator! I'm ready to deal with lazy lizasrds from Alachus way. Give me room!@

Dragon fly! You caner run but lizasrds slow down after a kilometre Im see ya!

Posted by Shipman 2004-11-20 2:38:19 PM|| 2004-11-20 2:38:19 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 Logically, the members of the UNSC should be composed of USA, Russia, China, India, Japan, EU, Africa (bloc) and SA (bloc). The VOTING members should only be those powers that are both economically and militarily powerful *and* who are willing to regularly use those forces for UNSC mandated missions. The UNSC should have a parallel and separate council composed solely of nuclear powers. This UNNSC should have voting members who admit they have nukes, are in full compliance with the IAEA, and are full members of the non-proliferation treaties and regime.

Posted by Anonymoose 2004-11-20 3:31:00 PM|| 2004-11-20 3:31:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Perhaps a rule stating that the UN representative must be elected or appointed by an elected (honest multi-party elections) body would be helpful. Something to keep out the kleptocracies and the communists and fascists.

Perhaps just eliminating the UN and replacing it with nothing would be the answer.

Posted by jackal 2004-11-20 7:49:57 PM|| [http://home.earthlink.net/~sleepyjackal/index.html] 2004-11-20 7:49:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 The UN can't be reformed, only replaced. The essential absurdity here is that the vast majority of the "world community's" member states are kleptocratic, incompetent non-governments. The UN fetishizes national sovereignty, thus giving free reign to these basket states to terrorize their own citizens.

The solution is to recognize that there is no "world community" and set about creating regionally-focused security entities, each with the US and the region's democratic powers at its core.

Posted by lex 2004-11-20 8:05:46 PM|| 2004-11-20 8:05:46 PM|| Front Page Top

00:03 Crerert Ebbeting3481
01:07 tipper
00:03 Mac Suirtain
23:57 Mac Suirtain
23:50 lex
23:45 .com
23:45 Matt
23:42 CrazyFool
23:38 .com
23:36 lex
23:34 lex
23:16 Frank G
23:11 Barbara Skolaut
22:59 Matt
22:54 3dc
22:45 Matt
22:41 hmmm
22:37 mojo
22:33 3dc
22:25 lex
22:23 lex
22:15 BillH
22:15 lex
22:12 lex