The US, The UN and Iraq

Perception: Add in to our benefits from having the UN in the US the considerable $$ contribution it makes through tourism, through rents paid by delegates, employees, etc. That's a bunch of bucks in NYC. In every possible way, we owe them a lot.

Where the heck did you get your bad impression of the UN?

0 Replies

from another page at the United States Mission to the U.N. site
http://www.un.int/usa/fact3.htm

Quote:

THE UNITED NATIONS -- MYTH AND REALITY
UN BUDGET AND BUREAUCRACY

FACT SHEET

The UN Regular Budget

Myth: The United Nations regular budget continues to increase even while budgets of many member state governments have been stable or actually declined. Fiscal discipline needs to be imposed on the UN

Reality: In the two-year budget period that ended in 1995, the UN spent $2.6 billion for its regular budget. That same budget for the current period (2002-2003) is approximately $2.6 billion, reflecting relative stability in the budget despite the increasing demands being placed on it. The U.S. has worked with other major UN contributors to ensure that UN resources are spent wisely and efficiently.

[Also see the section on Financing in the United Nations Fact Sheet.]

* * * * *

The UN Bureaucracy

Myth: The UN is a bloated bureaucracy. Whereas other organizations and businesses are downsizing, the UN continues to get bigger.

Reality: Hundreds of jobs have been eliminated from the UN Secretariat in recent years. The UN's budget for 2002-2003, for example, provides for fewer than 9,000 positions, compared with 10,021 posts in 1996-1997.

* * * * *

Myth: The UN is mismanaged and inefficient. Despite all the talk about reform, it's business as usual for the UN bureaucrats.

Reality: The UN has done a great deal to increase efficiency and overall accountability. In 1994, the UN created the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) to serve as the inspector general and promote efficient management and reduce waste, fraud and abuse. During the year ended June 30, 2001, OIOS recommended $58 million in savings and recoveries for the UN and persuaded UN program managers to implement hundreds of recommendations for improving management and internal controls. OIOS investigations also led to successful convictions of UN staff and others for fraud and stealing UN funds.

0 Replies

Now, kiddies, let's take a look at the Pentagon's "Fact" sheet! Contrast and compare!

0 Replies

Tartar wrote

Where the heck did you get your bad impression of the UN?

Well basically I got pretty sick to my stomach because so many here think UN will save us from our evil government. If any of you would take a serious look at the UN Charter you will see it is a toothless paper pussy cat encapable of even taking appropriate action against rogue states who are members and are guilty of Serious civil rights abuses which is meant to be BASIC reason for UN's existence. A while back I proposed a couple of functions that should be included in the the Charter thinking that people would read the Charter and see that those provisions already exist but are meaningless because the members are encapable of policing themselves----much less the entire world like everyone here seems to think they can do. Below are two articles under membership that should ring some bells in your minds. Take a look and tell me it this bunch of parasites will ever be relevant.

ARTICLES 5 AND 6 UNDER MEMBERSHIP THE UN CHARTER

Article 5
A Member of the United Nations against which preventive or enforcement action has been taken by the Security Council may be suspended from the exercise of the rights and privileges of membership by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. The exercise of these rights and privileges may be restored by the Security Council.

Article 6
A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.

Someone must deal with North Korea---- a member nation. Do you think the UN will?

Someone must deal with Iran and their budding nuclear program. Do you think the UN will ?

The UN has had 12 years to deal with Saddam---have they?

Instead they reward Iraq with the chairmanship of the disarmament committee.-----WHAT?????

They reward Syria with the chairmanship of the human rights committee.-------WHAT????

And you ask how I got a bad impression of the UN.......................

0 Replies

Oh. If it was a serious question, Steve, I withdraw my indignation. I don't know either and had not heard such rumors before your asking of the question.

0 Replies

The whole world is being played as an orchestra of fiddles.

0 Replies

Earlier in this thread, i posted a link to the United Nations charter, for those who would wish to read the entire document, and derive an informed opinion which does not rely upon selective quotation and invective.

0 Replies

perception wrote:

...they reward Iraq with the chairmanship of the disarmament committee.-----WHAT?????
They reward Syria with the chairmanship of the human rights committee.-------WHAT????

If this was not the reality (and, unfortunately, it is), I would think that this is a quotation of some parody on the Orwell's "1984"...
Thanks God, they did not appoint the Taliban representative (when Taliban ruled Afghanistan) to be a chairman of UNESCO...

0 Replies

perception wrote:

Instead they reward Iraq with the chairmanship of the disarmament committee.-----WHAT?????

They reward Syria with the chairmanship of the human rights committee.-------WHAT????

And we've got old Rumsfeld, Saddam's buddy and partner in crime, for a Secretary of Defense. But, of course, he's politically correct from a conservative point of view, so it's probably bad form to question his motives, his past . . .

0 Replies

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan.html

Quote:

Given the obstacles to development of a natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan, it seems unlikely that such an idea will make any progress in the near future, and no major Western companies have expressed interest in reviving the project. The security situation in Afghanistan is one obvious major risk, and the tensions between India and Pakistan make it unlikely that such a pipeline could be extended into India, which unlike Pakistan has sufficient immediate demand for imported natural gas to justify a project of such magnitude. Financial problems in the utility sector in India, which would be the major consumer of the natural gas, also could pose a problem.

"The Pipeline" remains a Pipe Dream. Neither India nor Pakistan, chief benficiaries of the proposed system, are presently able or willing to finance it, Afghanistan surely cannot finance it, and the Western and Former Soviet Petroleum Conglomerates show no real enthusiasm.

"The Afghan Pipeline" is a concept, not an issue.

Oh, and as for troops "On Ground" in Northern Iraq, hard numbers are hard to come by, for obvious reasons. However, US Special Ops Forces have been "In Country" for quite some time. Significant physical upgrading of Northern Iraqi Airfields has been revealed by commercial satellite imagert, something The Kurds, who nominally control the region, are capable of, so one may infer US Engineer Units have been there a while, too. Turkey has long had a presence as part of her own efforts to deal with The Kurds on both sides of the border, and there now appear to be Iranian ground troops in the area, on the Iran-Iraq Border, likely with some presence in Iraq. Links to articles on all of these deployments are elsewhere in this thread, and have been discussed at some length. My own observation, also previously discussed hereon, is that the presence of these third-party militaries greatly increases the potential for an accidental flareup of hostilities among any of the players. It is getting truly scary, and the unpredictabilities mount.

Setanta, my reading of The UN Charter, and of the relevant Resolutions, lead me to maintain the current US stance is not only justified but mandated. I see The UN's reluctance to come to grips with the issue as an abdication of its chartered responsibility and a repudiation of the UN's claim to be a responsible force for the protection of human rights and the preservation of peace. This too I've gone into at great length on this thread, with quotes from The Charter and The Resolutions. My feeling is that it is well past time for the UN to do what it claims to be about.

timber

0 Replies

Hear, hear, timber, on all points.

0 Replies

Nicely put, Timber.

0 Replies

peace
http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/ <won't let me post a link.....>

0 Replies

littlek, well yeah but you know they are all "peacenics" mindless drug infested non-rational brain dead un-american scum of the earth. Wink

(and me too)

0 Replies

I don't agree, Timber. My point of view echoes another: "More jaw jaw and less war war!" (or something like that...!)

I've used Nixon and China as an example before: the realization that isolating a nation makes it more dangerous than opening it to negotiations AND for trade. What I'm reading here is well-known American impatience: "There's a problem? Let's solve it NOW!" Kind of like those surgeons who like to operate. What I propose is less surgery and more prevention. That, in fact, is the purpose of the UN. No organization or agency is perfect. The UN is nothing more nor less than an agency to prevent dangerous political extremism from leading to war. It takes patience, Timber, the willingness to deal with people you believe are wrong or immoral or "evil," understanding that they in turn think you are wrong, immoral and evil. Patient negotiation is way, way better than war, whether we're taking our standards from pacifists and moralists, from Christianity or Islam, or whether we're simply people who value human life and a healthy world.

The cooler heads who've been following the situation all say, without exception, that the past ten or so years show Saddam can be successfully contained. I think it's indisputable. Having the UN as our (the world's) time-out room and moral monitor is the world's way of finally outlawing the use of war as a political solution. The last thing we want now is to wipe out that progress and restore war as the dangerous "solution" it always was.

0 Replies

Could one of the many able researchers on this thread please look up U.N. resolutions and let the rest of us know:

1. How many countries are currently in breach of U.N. resolutions?
2. How many resolutions is each of those countries in breach of?

Finally, and if a point (3) wouldn't involve too much extra work, what, if anything, is being done to enforce those resolutions, and by whom? Thanks from me in advance to whomever undertakes that effort; it might be useful in placing Iraq's breaches of U.N. resolutions in perspective.

0 Replies

Hmmm. Maybe 2.2?

0 Replies

HofT, i have posted (quite a way back now, this thread moves at high speed) links for SCR 686 and SCR 1441. It is also quite simple to type "United Nations" into a search engine, and go to their site. However, their site is not well set-up for the clueless user (as i was, when first i looked into Chapman's Homer), so you need to know what you're looking for. A hint, to find SCR's, you should first select Security Council, and then the "Security" link on that page. In my earlier posting, i also gave a link for the UN charter.

0 Replies

HofT, It seems Israel ignores more UN Resolutions than any other country - according to this link. http://www.jeffsarchive.com/israel/Israel%20Leads%20in%20Ignoring%20UN%20Resolutions.html

0 Replies

Timber, although i agree with your assessment of Security Council "spinelessness," i was simply pointing out that the mechanisms exist in the UN charter to deal with this situation, and that no SCR, from 686, 687 and 688 through 1441, specifically authorize the United States, acting alone, with only British support, nor with full UN support, to invade Iraq. As you already know, i disagree about the necessity or desirability of war. I do not agree with you that the present US stance is mandated.

0 Replies

The US, The UN and Iraq

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know