To the critics of the UN

[zerorelations]

Many brave men died in WW2 and one of the good things that came from that , created by the survivors, was the UN charter. Of course there is corruption in the UN but there is corruption in the Senate and Congress and no-one talks of getting rid of or ignoring them. If its corrupt then lets fight the corruption, if its ineffective then lets reform it to and allow it to use force if necessary to keep the peace.
The point is that for all its flaws, it was put in place by our grandparents as safeguard to prevent another world war - yet I hear it berated so often by some Americans (and British) . Don't they realize that without an international forum for diplomacy and to enforce international law nobody will be safe including them ?
To dismiss the UN charter is to give up on the dreams of international peace our grandparents longed for us and to not support it and make it more effective is to hasten our demise as a species and insult the sacrifices they made for us.
So I post here the UN charter preamble and invite a debate on the institution that our ancestors died for in the hope that people realize that as a document it is every bit as important to the achievement human freedom, justice and equality as the constitution and the Bill of rights :

[USMC the Almighty]

I have some personal reasons for hating the U.N. -- one of my buddies (Army Delta Force) was in Mogadishu in '94 and U.N. "soldiers" wouldn't let him get into one of their tanks. After just fighting for 18 hours, he had to run some two miles to the Pakistani soccer stadium under gun fire.

At any rate, perhaps when the U.N. does something effective, then we'll buy it. I don't think the U.S. should be literally keeping afloat such a corrupt, blatantly anti-America, anti-Israeli organization.

When they start protecting and looking out for our interests -- then maybe I can support them.

Honestly though, how can they be effective when they wear blue helmets and drive white tanks?

[Lilly Marlene]

Hereyago,
I can appreciate how you feel about the ideals of the UN.
Personally, I would like to see the US pull out of it altogether.
We pay *I think* one third of the cost of maintaining it; not only is it corrupt but it's also largely ineffective at realizing its goals.

A further problem with the UN, to me, is my own loathing of the 'global governance' agenda.

My spidey sense kicks in when I hear of the UN trying to steer nations towards abolition of gun ownership rights for instance.

[palerider]

Hereyago,
I can appreciate how you feel about the ideals of the UN.
Personally, I would like to see the US pull out of it altogether.
We pay *I think* one third of the cost of maintaining it; not only is it corrupt but it's also largely ineffective at realizing its goals.

A further problem with the UN, to me, is my own loathing of the 'global governance' agenda.

My spidey sense kicks in when I hear of the UN trying to steer nations towards abolition of gun ownership rights for instance.

Something else we agree on. Disturbing, isn't it?

[Lilly Marlene]

Something else we agree on. Disturbing, isn't it?


:confused:
Where have I taken the wrong turning ?

[palerider]

:confused:
Where have I taken the wrong turning ?


More like an accidental right turn.

[Lilly Marlene]

It's only common sense and by some fluky happenstance, neocons are on board with it ...

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day !

[palerider]

It's only common sense and by some fluky happenstance, neocons are on board with it ...

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day !

Conservativism is all about common sense. Observation. Believing what one sees with one's eyes. Hardly surprising that conservatives universally want the US out.

[vyo476]

The only person to really address the point of the thread here seems to be Lilly. Why pull out? Why not take the time and the effort to try and reform the damn thing? It may seem anti-American, but since so many Americans seem anti-UN is that very surprising? As much as hereyago's history was flawed (the UN was chartered during the war, not after it, and I'm not sure that the UN is currently a bulwark of international safety - more of a shoddy plank for the French and the Russians to ***** at us at this point) I still like the idea of a half-decent international solidarity group. We're in the Information Age now and the world is a much, much smaller place than it was sixty years ago. If anything we need the UN more now than we did in the forties.

[The Founders Intent]

I think we stay with the UN so we can keep an eye on our enemies. USMC, I have friends that flew during that mission for the 160th.

[Sgt Schultz]

I believe it is in the best interests of the US to be actively involved in the UN. While the UN has strayed from some of its ideals it still serves a function in the world of politics. I run into many who want the US to pull out of the UN but I have to ask what is the alternative? Where else do we have for the nations of the world to come together to at least try to have some dialogue and address the issues that affect the world. What is your alternative? Yes, there is a need for reform and some changes which need to be addressed but doing away with it does no one any good.

[9sublime]

I think that until the US truely supports the UN, it will be useless and it just shows America's arrogance that they do not support the UN enough but always call on it to invoke sanctions etc. I'm not a fan of the UN the way it stands at the moment but having said that,

if anyone wants to see a film called 'Warriors' about UN soldiers having to stay neutral in Bosnia (watching kids getting taken away and slaughtered elsewhere), then I can send it to you. It was a BBC film and its a really touching film.

[invest07]

The UN is hopelessly corrupt and I object strongly to the use of my hard earned tax dollars to pay the bills for this institution.
The UN ran the "Oil for Food" program and it has been labelled as the biggest scam of all time, transferring more money illegally than any other fraud in history.
The UN is rabidly anti-semitic, Americaphobic (my word, hopefully self explanatory) and disrespectful of national sovereignity.
The UN's big push today is for a worldwide carbon tax, paid to them.
See carbontax.org for some details.
We need to withdraw our large committment, scaling our contribution back to our fair share. We also need to remove the UN from US soil.

[vyo476]

The UN is hopelessly corrupt and I object strongly to the use of my hard earned tax dollars to pay the bills for this institution.
The UN ran the "Oil for Food" program and it has been labelled as the biggest scam of all time, transferring more money illegally than any other fraud in history.
The UN is rabidly anti-semitic, Americaphobic (my word, hopefully self explanatory) and disrespectful of national sovereignity.
The UN's big push today is for a worldwide carbon tax, paid to them.
See carbontax.org for some details.
We need to withdraw our large committment, scaling our contribution back to our fair share. We also need to remove the UN from US soil.

How would you propose we go about reorganizing an international solidarity organization? I can't dispute what you've said here, the UN is all of those things and more. At the same time, though, I can't help but think that in the coming years we're going to need international solidarity more and more.

[johnconkle]

Many brave men did die in WWII. Not to create the UN Charter, but to defend and protect the Constitution of America. The UN was created by the same people who controls The World bank to issue in a "one world government." They failed to do so after WWI (The League Of Nations), but was successful with the United Nations. The UN Charter is absolutely "repugnant" to the Constitution. They cannot exist side by side. I urge people to really look at the UN, it's history and what it's trying to accomplish. It has nothing to do with freedom, and everything to do with destroying America.

[Grounded]

Many brave men did die in WWII. Not to create the UN Charter, but to defend and protect the Constitution of America. The UN was created by the same people who controls The World bank to issue in a "one world government." They failed to do so after WWI (The League Of Nations), but was successful with the United Nations. The UN Charter is absolutely "repugnant" to the Constitution. They cannot exist side by side. I urge people to really look at the UN, it's history and what it's trying to accomplish. It has nothing to do with freedom, and everything to do with destroying America.

Good stuff.

But can you give specific examples where the constitution collides with the UN charter? Maybe some links?

[The Founders Intent]

I think that until the US truely supports the UN, it will be useless and it just shows America's arrogance that they do not support the UN enough but always call on it to invoke sanctions etc. I'm not a fan of the UN the way it stands at the moment but having said that,

if anyone wants to see a film called 'Warriors' about UN soldiers having to stay neutral in Bosnia (watching kids getting taken away and slaughtered elsewhere), then I can send it to you. It was a BBC film and its a really touching film.

What the hell are you talking about? If it weren't for all the money the US pours into the rat hole, it wouldn't exist. They need to stop electing chairmans from countries that support corruption. Putting terrorists in charge of human rights committees is a GD joke.

[9sublime]

America is quite happy to support the thing, then follow what it wants. And you think the UN is run by terrorists? Most of those people might come from countries that have a terrorist problem, but they are not all terrorists. It's like calling the US representative in the UN obese, even if he isn't, just because hes American.

[Castle]

My biggest problem with the UN is it's refusal to enforce any of its resolutions, in effect, making it a toothless organization as well as a bottomless money pit.

If the UN was simply created as a neutral table for all countries to have a voice then I would have a different opinion but it is apparently more than that. If it is more then that, I expect more. We're getting much less in my opinion.

I gasped when I saw the US contribution to the UN! In 2001 it was over 3 Billion dollars and in 2005 it was over 5 billion!! - yes thats billion with a "B". That is roughly 25% if the UN's total annual budget! What have US taxpayers seen for their contributions? A total inability of the UN to enforce it's own resolutions. An oil for food scandal that allowed Saddam to make billions around sanctions and was of ZERO benefit to his people. Now that the scandal has been buried, can anyone remember who was held accountable? Oh, thats right, no one! I particularly enjoyed the offensive speeches we were subjected to on our own soil by Iranian and Venezuelan leaders. I think Americans are big enough to get over this but it seems to me we could get the same results and treatment for free.

I'm not of the opinion that the UN serves no purpose. Nor do I think that it is impossible to fix the issues that plague the current UN. I am, however saying that if it continues to be little more than an expensive cocktail party then I have little interest in funding it or hosting it!

-Castle

[invest07]

The UN is as useless an organization as has ever been created. You are correct in that the UN issues decrees and then doesn't enforce them. The UN issued decrees to Saddam Hussein and he did nothing to comply. And what did the UN do in response? They issued more decrees. 17 in all. GWB, for all his shortcomings, realized the impotence of the UN and removed Saddam by force.
I am a borderline isolationist and it is my opinion we don't need the UN. Certainly our contribution should be only a per capita share and not 25-33%. And if you ask a New Yorker, he/she will most likely say that the UN diplomats are a pain in the rear. The UN occupies some very valuable real estate and I, for one, would like to see the UN relocated to W Europe.
To vyo476:
I don't propose reorganizing the UN. They wouldn't pay any attention to us, anyway. The UN is what it is: a noble idea but totally impotent in execution.
If you want to gain a greater understanding of the UN and it's relationship to the global warming hysteria, check out this site:
carbontax.org
The UN wants to tax industrial nations, (translation: you and me) and use the money to "fight" global warming. What that really means is that they want to tax you and piss away your hard earned dineros.
Never forget that the UN is solely responsible for the greatest monetary scam in history: Oil for Food. This scheme involves more fraud than even the Ponzi scheme we call Social Security.

[vyo476]

Actually, technically America is a "post-industrial" nation now, as our economy is now primary service-based. One of the big reasons that a lot of people aren't willing to look at emissions-reduction models is because they'd almost certainly scare away what few industries we have left.