Here's an example as to why the UN is a joke

[Ashock]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060901/ap_on_..._ea/syria_annan


Annan: Syria to enforce arms embargo By SAM F. GHATTAS, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 10 minutes ago



U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Friday that Syria had pledged to step up border patrols and work with the Lebanese army to stop the flow of weapons to Hezbollah.

Annan also said that he had asked Syrian President Bashar Assad to use his nation's influence to help win the release of three Israeli soldiers held by Lebanese and Palestinian militants allied with Damascus.

According to Annan, Assad said at a meeting in Damascus that Syria will boost the number of its guards along the Lebanon-Syria border and establish joint patrols with the Lebanese army "where possible."

Israel has insisted that the international force be stationed along the Syrian frontier, although Assad has warned that such a presence would be considered "hostile."

Annan said Assad restated "Syria's objection to the presence of foreign forces along the Lebanese-Syrian borders."

The U.N. chief spoke with reporters at the Damascus airport before departing for Qatar. Assad made no public comments after the meeting.

The Aug. 11 resolution that halted fighting between Israel and Hezbollah calls on countries to prevent the sale or supply of weapons to entities in Lebanon without the consent of the Lebanese government or U.N. peacekeepers. It also calls for Lebanon to "secure its borders and other entry points."

Syria promised to "undertake as soon as possible" measures to increase its number of border guards and give them additional training and equipment, Annan said. Syria will also establish liaisons with the Lebanese armed forces, border police and international personnel "in order to set up an effective interdiction regime," the secretary-general added.

Asked whether such measures would succeed in blocking arms shipments to Hezbollah, Annan replied: "I think it can happen. It may not be 100 percent, but it will make quite a lot of difference if the government puts in place the measures the government has discussed with me. I have no reason to believe it will not be done."

On the issue of disarming Hezbollah, Annan said Assad "accepts and supports the decisions of Lebanese national dialogue on disarmament of militias."

Before the 34-day war, Lebanese politicians failed to reach consensus on Hezbollah's arsenal. Since then Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah has defended his group's need for weapons, but said he was open to dialogue on the matter.

Annan has said the expanded U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, would not disarm Hezbollah — calling the issue a matter for the Lebanese to decide.

The only Syrian comment after the Assad-Annan meeting came from Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, who would not comment on details but said: "Now there is a window that can be benefited from if the international community is truthful in its efforts toward a just and comprehensive peace. Otherwise, the other bad choice (war) is possible."

Annan said he and Assad agreed that the cessation of hostilities in Lebanon provided an opportunity to move toward greater Mideast peace.

Assad is prepared to establish diplomatic ties with Lebanon and delineate the border between the two countries, Annan said. He added that he encouraged the Syrian leader to meet with Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora, who is backed by an anti-Syrian majority. Assad told him he was ready to meet Saniora any time.

As for the Israeli soldiers, Assad said he supported their release, but raised the question of the release of 16 Syrians detained on the Golan Heights for opposing the Israeli occupation of that Syrian territory.




Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.




No comments, really. Just :blink:


-A

[Jarulf]

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

No comments, really. Just :blink:
-A

Indeed:blink:

As for the topic, what is so surprising? That some like to waive resolutions as the most important things in the world and that everyone should follow them, while disregarding others they don't like? Or that what topics is brought up to start with are a few selected while there can be similar, identical or worse cases that are ignored and won't get a resolution? Or the fact that that part of UN basically works by having a few countries "rule" all others? While themselves being immune (and probably ignoring the others anyway should they feel so). Or was it somethig else that was a joke that I did not understand, you wrote very little about it so I can only guess (and my english might not be the best as well).


EDIT: Are the forums in a bad mood and get "stuck" at times? It tends to eat posts and I just hate to rewrite a text that IE looses due to that (yeah, have to use it on this computer) and can't remember. I have got several cases of internal server error and part of the furm pages just not loading, just standing there whiel the front page of the forum for example load fine.

[Occhidiangela]

No comments, really. Just :blink:
-A

Kofi Annan, IIRC, was supported by Pres Clinton's foks as the most tractable of useful idiots when Boutros Boutros Ghali became unpalatable near the end of his term as Secretary General. Kofi has remained a useful idiot ever since. For the moment, he is merely being used by one party, and his ill temper at being blown off by George Bush's administration in 2003 over the Iraq war is an easy bit of leverage for anyone to use when they want him to speak out in support of their side of a dispute.

I am still giggling over Assad's assertion that his border guards will somehow stop transhipment of arms into Lebanon. He knows how far a bribe can go in Syria. :lol:

Occhi

[Ashock]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060920/ap_on_...HNlYwMlJVRPUCUl Edit: The link does not want to work as I copied/pasted it. Oh well.


At U.N., Chavez calls Bush 'the devil' By IAN JAMES, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 10 minutes ago



Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez took his verbal battle with the United States to the floor of the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, calling President Bush "the devil."

"The devil came here yesterday," Chavez said, referring to Bush's address Tuesday. "He came here talking as if he were the owner of the world."

The leftist leader, who has joined Iran in opposing U.S. influence, accused Washington of "domination, exploitation and pillage of peoples of the world."

"We appeal to the people of the United States and the world to halt this threat, which is like a sword hanging over our head," he said.

He also said the U.N. "doesn't work" in its current system and is "antidemocratic." He called for reform, saying the U.S. government's "immoral veto" had allowed recent Israeli bombings of Lebanon to continue unabated for more than a month.

"Venezuela once again proposes today that we reform the United Nations," he said. He drew tentative giggles at times from the audience, but also some applause when called U.S. "imperialism" a menace.

Chavez lambasted Washington for trying to block Venezuela's campaign for a rotating seat on the U.N. Security Council. He said if chosen over U.S.-favorite Guatemala in a secret-ballot U.N. vote next month, Venezuela would be "the voice of the Third World."

The U.S. government warns that Chavez, a close ally of Iran, Syria and Cuba, would be a disruptive force on the council.


Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback





Personally, I think we should let those guys sit on the Security Council. They are worthy successors to Syria.

Now, why are we still donating $5 Billion/year to these chubs? More than 50% of the nations in the UN are non-Democratic. OTOH, the US, Japan and Western Europe contribute 75% of the funds for this collection of criminals. Without us, they are done. When will we learn?


-A

[Occhidiangela]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060920/ap_on_...HNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
He also said the U.N. "doesn't work" in its current system and is "antidemocratic." He called for reform, saying the U.S. government's "immoral veto" had allowed recent Israeli bombings of Lebanon to continue unabated for more than a month.

"Venezuela once again proposes today that we reform the United Nations," he said.

Funny, when the US Congress called for that, reform of the UN, the righteous indignation of the World of Wogcraft rose up to protest that the US wasn't "paying its dues." Reforming the UN begins with accoutability, and financial transparency, as well as exposure of the patronage networks and nepotism in its daily workings. I have yet to see a bureaucrat, UN or otherwise, who handled that well, particularly in the tea room atmosphere of "diplomatic circles."

Now, why are we still donating $5 Billion/year to these chubs? More than 50% of the nations in the UN are non-Democratic. OTOH, the US, Japan and Western Europe contribute 75% of the funds for this collection of criminals. Without us, they are done. When will we learn?

Chavez and a number of the Isolationist rhetoriticians in the US are in good company: they find the UN to be undemocratic, but for different reasons.

Chavez, the Saddam Hussein of South America. Lord love a duck, and Brazil.

Occhi

[Ashock]

Chavez and a number of the Isolationist rhetoriticians in the US are in good company: they find the UN to be undemocratic, but for different reasons.

Occhi

I can just summarize the revered (by many, here and everywhere) United Nation in one sentence.

Any agency that the USSR used to quote, paraphrase and generally like, is an agency I want no part of.

Simple as that. I am still (yes, still) flabbergasted as to how many people are blind to what the UN is and the type of members it's compised of. Seems like way too many people in the West are like a battered wife who after each beating says and thinks that "he can change, he loves me". I don't get it, I just don't get it. I mean wishful thinking is one thing, but this is rediculous. Of course we both know the type of people I'm talking about (yeh, seems like it's our own private thread;)) , no need to get into more details...


-A

[eppie]

Now, why are we still donating $5 Billion/year to these chubs? More than 50% of the nations in the UN are non-Democratic. OTOH, the US, Japan and Western Europe contribute 75% of the funds for this collection of criminals. Without us, they are done. When will we learn?
-A

Stop whining!
Unlike you say, the US usually does not pay its contribution. Moreover, you have a veto-right....even when you don't care about most resolution. If the US would be really fare they would just step out of the UN.
It is very easy to have critisism, but not very credible with the terms.

[Occhidiangela]

Stop whining!
Unlike you say, the US usually does not pay its contribution. Moreover, you have a veto-right....even when you don't care about most resolution. If the US would be really fare they would just step out of the UN.
It is very easy to have critisism, but not very credible with the terms.

Way to lie through your teeth, eppie.

The US contribution to the peacekeeping bill for the UN was being assessed at 25% of the whole peacekeeping budget, and was in dispute for a few years by our Congress. It has since been renegotiated down 22%, due to the UN bureaucracy's complete inability to act in a fiscally responsible manner with funds sent. The "regular membership dues" was never in dispute. Would you care to discuss how China has managed to dodge a re-evaluation percentage share of the UN's operationg costs, despite having one of the largest GDP's on the planet?

"Usually doesn't pay" is sheerest horsesh**. From inception to today, who has payed the lion's share of UN expenses? It sure as hell isn't the Netherlands. Put a sock in it until you get your numbers straight, rather than repeating a blatant falsehood.

Need I mention, year after year, missions undertaken, at costs in the billions, in support of UN goals and missions (see the Sinai peacekeeping force as one data point, feed the starving morons of Somalia for another) but not explicitly under "Security Council ordered and controlled" operations.

If you keep repeating a lie often enough, eppie, you might start to believe it. That doesn't make it true.

Occhi

[ShadowHM]

All joking aside, what do you propose as an alternative?

[kandrathe]

All joking aside, what do you propose as an alternative?

How about other nations taking the UN seriously? How about we add Libya, Syria, Sudan, and Zimbabwe all on the UN commission for human rights, but then kick the US off for abuses? Bawhahahaha! What a funny joke! Ok, seriously, what's next? Oh, yeah! Maybe we could get Iraq to chair the 2003 UN Disarmarment Forum? Bahahahahahaha! What a bunch of crack ups those UN people! We can ignore Darfur though, Sudan is on the human rights commission.

The President of Venezuela calls our leader the devil. Oh yeah. This UN thing is really productive. I offer UN Watch as another perspective on the UN, and what it has become.

Perhaps we should heed;

Ahmadinejad, who was mayor of Tehran until his election, told other leaders: "The greatest challenge of our age is the gradual spiritual depravation of human beings brought about by the distancing of the prevailing order from morality and unity of monotheism."

"The United Nations should lead in the promotion of spirituality and compassion for humanity," he added. Al Jazeera

Ok, seriously. How about this, when nations thumb their noses at the UN we get serious together and actually do something about it together, and when the going gets tough we don't all argue amongst ourselves and then have some of us toss in the towel which then results in a contentious war? Case in point, Iraq. If everyone had followed the sanctions regime, Iraq would have been isolated. But, due to massive corruption and cheating, sanctions failed resulting in a war and the mess we now see ourselves in.

So what the heck is Jaques Chirac up to? Is he tired of his spine, or did he ever have one?

[ShadowHM]

*shrugs*

So the UN is a mess. So the UN is just as divided as oh, say.... Canadians are about how to handle aboriginal rights. :rolleyes:

The President of Venezuela calls our leader the devil. Oh yeah. This UN thing is really productive.

And the President of the U.S. of A. talked about an axis of evil. That was productive too, right? :whistling:

Singing Kumbaya together (in harmony, even) would be nice, but the world is still a messy divided place. We still have a smaller planet than ever before.

I wish there was an alternative. Joke or not, right now it is the best venue we have for nations to talk to each other. Posturing will go on forever, just as it does within any group of humans, no?

OTOH, if venting helped you, I am sorry to have intruded. :)

[kandrathe]

And you may call it righteousness
When civility survives,
But I've had dinner with the Devil and
I know nice from right.

You had dinner with GW?

OTOH, if venting helped you, I am sorry to have intruded. :)

I just get a teensy bit fed up with the expensive puppet show theatre, where we are trashed by 99% of the nations on the planet, then end up footing the bill. Why do we pay for this abuse?

[--Pete]

Hi,

I just get a teensy bit fed up with the expensive puppet show theatre, where we are trashed by 99% of the nations on the planet, then end up footing the bill. Why do we pay for this abuse?

It's dialog of the crappiest type, but it beats no dialog at all. There seems to be but two choices in international relations: talk or invade. Invade is more expensive and, as we've seen in the past and are seeing now, it usually is a failure. So the only world forum may suck, but it's what we've got. If Neanderthals like Shrub put in half the effort into making it work that they exert in bashing it and circumventing it, it could actually be useful.

So, yeah, maybe the UN needs to be revamped. The world power has shifted a little (OK, a lot) since the end of WW II and the founders of the UN were not as foresighted as they could have been. So the UN with it's anachronisms and strange structure is what we've got. Think of it as the Articles of Confederation for the world. One day, with luck, a self designated World Congress will spin off a Constitutional Convention, and we'll have a better way of resolving our international problems.

And as far as USA bashing is concerned, the top dog has always been the top target. If it bugs you, then grow a thicker skin.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

...
If it bugs you, then grow a thicker skin.
--Pete

I am getting older, so I think it gets thinner. Does anyone else find it ironic that Chavez comes to the US to exercise a freedom of speech his government denies its own citizens, and excoriates our president for things he does or would do himself if given the chance? It will be interesting to see if Chomsky embraces or distances himself from his new friend.

[Occhidiangela]

Hi,
It's dialog of the crappiest type, but it beats no dialog at all. There seems to be but two choices in international relations: talk or invade. Invade is more expensive and, as we've seen in the past and are seeing now, it usually is a failure. So the only world forum may suck, but it's what we've got. If Neanderthals like Shrub put in half the effort into making it work that they exert in bashing it and circumventing it, it could actually be useful.

So, yeah, maybe the UN needs to be revamped. The world power has shifted a little (OK, a lot) since the end of WW II and the founders of the UN were not as foresighted as they could have been. So the UN with it's anachronisms and strange structure is what we've got. Think of it as the Articles of Confederation for the world. One day, with luck, a self designated World Congress will spin off a Constitutional Convention, and we'll have a better way of resolving our international problems.

And as far as USA bashing is concerned, the top dog has always been the top target. If it bugs you, then grow a thicker skin.

--Pete

As Rummy the Quipster might have said:
"You don't deal in geopolitics with the World Bodies you wish you had, you deal in geopolitics with the World Bodies you have." ;)

Well, maybe Cheney, Bush, the Rumster, and the usual suspects wouldn't have taken that line.

I wonder if any of them realize that being sworn into office doesn't make one the Boss, it makes one a servant of the Republic.

Occhi

[ShadowHM]

You had dinner with GW?

That quote in my signature was chosen following a somewhat heated debate at another forum over the distinction between substance and style. I took the position that I would rather support right than nice, if those are my choices. Apparently there are some who differ. :unsure:

GW has yet to put me on his dinner invitation list. I am trying not to feel slighted. ;)

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . it makes one a servant of the Republic.

What a quaint, eighteenth century notion.:) After Lincoln, TR, and FDR, does the concept of "We the People . . ." have any viability left? Especially since, as the majority has shown in everything from mandatory vaccinations to increased airport <strike>pointless inconvenience</strike> security, "We the People" have lost our spines and would rather feel safe than be free? As long as we, as a nation, focus more on the foibles of media and sports personalities than we do on the machinations of politicians, we deserve every bit of the screwing those politicians give us. And, unless we make them 'public servants' by, if not eternal, at least occasional vigilance, then they will indeed be our masters.

--Pete

[eppie]

I am getting older, so I think it gets thinner. Does anyone else find it ironic that Chavez comes to the US to exercise a freedom of speech his government denies its own citizens, and excoriates our president for things he does or would do himself if given the chance? It will be interesting to see if Chomsky embraces or distances himself from his new friend.

Not every government that doesn't like the USA is a dictatorship. I guess you also thinks France as no freedpm of speech:D.

No seriously, about your being sick of paying for everything...look at you own government. People in the US are getting rich....f I was a tax payer i the US I would share your concern....but don't blame the UN or other countries.

[kandrathe]

Not every government that doesn't like the USA is a dictatorship. I guess you also thinks France as no freedpm of speech:D.

No seriously, about your being sick of paying for everything...look at you own government. People in the US are getting rich....f I was a tax payer i the US I would share your concern....but don't blame the UN or other countries.

How about you read up on Chavez and his repression before you embrace him?

HRW - Venezuela: Curbs on Free Expression Tightened

I never said he was a dictator. I said he was enjoying a freedom that if an opponent of his had uttered in Venezuala would have landed the person in jail for treason. Since his supporters also form a majority in the legislature he was able to increase the judiciary from 20 to 32 seats (also five seats needed to be filled). Hugo Chavez appointed 17 of the 32 seats with his cronies and supporters. Now his rule encompasses the presidency, legislature and the courts. Does he act like a dictator? Does it seem like Venezuela is becoming a dictatorship?

[Occhidiangela]

Hi,
What a quaint, eighteenth century notion.:) After Lincoln, TR, and FDR, does the concept of "We the People . . ." have any viability left?

--Pete

I guess not. With the growing Neo-balkanization of AMerica into blocs of hyphenated pseudo citizens and non-assimilationists attests, We the people aren't We, but a collection of "theys."

Occhi