1
   

Question Mark on United Nations Dignity...

 
 
Reply Mon 28 Aug, 2006 06:05 am
I have read a very good article today titled and I totally agree with the words of Shoeb Hamid, an author of this article. According to him 22 per cent of its finances are payable by America. Money plays an important role in the decisions taken by the UN.
>> Link of his article
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,183 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Aug, 2006 06:11 pm
@Amrita cv,
I don't see how you can insist that the US has so much influence when so many UN decisions are contrary to the good of the US , much less the world in general .
Why should we be the major funding source of the UN ? Do you think so because of the wealth we possess ? What about China , and for that matter , Japan ? Some would have us believe they are soon to be more economically powerful than we are now . Will you then ask why they have too much priveledge ?
Again , why should we be the major support of a body that seems intent on lowering our laws to the level of third world countries , and puts known terrorists in charge of committees on war crimes and such ?
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Aug, 2006 09:00 pm
@Amrita cv,
Personally i think they should move, some where off US soil. Like France maybe, i know a few good Islamic extremist countrys that would love to have them.
0 Replies
 
Willie cv
 
  1  
Reply Sat 9 Sep, 2006 05:43 pm
@Curmudgeon,
Curmudgeon;4486 wrote:
I don't see how you can insist that the US has so much influence when so many UN decisions are contrary to the good of the US , much less the world in general .
Why should we be the major funding source of the UN ? Do you think so because of the wealth we possess ? What about China , and for that matter , Japan ? Some would have us believe they are soon to be more economically powerful than we are now . Will you then ask why they have too much priveledge ?
Again , why should we be the major support of a body that seems intent on lowering our laws to the level of third world countries , and puts known terrorists in charge of committees on war crimes and such ?



We used to be two things you failed to see:

1) compassionate leaders in humanitary treatment of all and

2) a wealthy nation.

Bush has destroyed them both. Bush wants his Trilateral Commission and the World Bank to replace the UN and not do humantarian work (has Bush done one war or invasion where oil was not involved), but to get all nations wages lowered so his corporate handful of pals can have a field day going where they want on this planet and we will be their slaves.

Not far fetched...ask yourself where have all the jobs gone?
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 12:12 pm
@Willie cv,
Willie;4511 wrote:
We used to be two things you failed to see:

1) compassionate leaders in humanitary treatment of all and

2) a wealthy nation.

Bush has destroyed them both. Bush wants his Trilateral Commission and the World Bank to replace the UN and not do humantarian work (has Bush done one war or invasion where oil was not involved), but to get all nations wages lowered so his corporate handful of pals can have a field day going where they want on this planet and we will be their slaves.

Not far fetched...ask yourself where have all the jobs gone?
Quote:
1) compassionate leaders in humanitary treatment of all and

Who are we not humanitarian too? We have yet to behead any one in this engagement? I'd like to here some specific situations? So i may decide for myself if your arguement is even comparable?
Quote:
2) a wealthy nation.

California is the worlds fifth largest economy Now say that again.
Quote:
Bush has destroyed them both.

Really, then the humanitarians must not of been too compassionate If they let monkeyboy effect there good works.
Quote:
Bush wants his Trilateral Commission and the World Bank to replace the UN and not do humantarian work

Sounds good to me, if we had not stepped in for the UN what number of resolution do you think they would be on trying to contain Saddam? 18 was the last count.
Quote:
(has Bush done one war or invasion where oil was not involved),

I think since the world industrial revolution, pretty much every war since then, oil has been involved. Or are you trying to imply any war before Bush was oiless?
Quote:
but to get all nations wages lowered so his corporate handful of pals can have a field day going where they want on this planet and we will be their slaves.
So by lowering wages it inables corporate fellows to enslave the mass's? By any chance are you a conspriacy theorist? If not then you should have some proof for your words? A wed link spuing the same bile does not constitute proof.
So exactly who points the gun at you and forces you to buy gas?
Quote:
Not far fetched...ask yourself where have all the jobs gone?

Jobs? I thought we were trying too "get all nations wages lowered" that seems to counter act your statement, which is it. Are we lowering wages world wide or farming out our jobs so other countrys can make some cash? According to you we are doing both? If we are that would make Bush a supergenious and that just can't be can it?
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 06:16 pm
@Drnaline,
"1) compassionate leaders in humanitary treatment of all and

2) a wealthy nation."

I contend that we are still both of those , Bush has destroyed nothing but some radical Islamic terrorists' ability to attack us directly , has helped Afghanistan and Irag begin the path toward Democracy , and reacted to terrorist attacks and plans that nations like Iran have stated publicly as their goals .
How do you suggest we should react to the unbelievable things the UN has done lately ?
0 Replies
 
markx15
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 06:47 pm
@Amrita cv,
The UN exists as a project to further unite the world, it obivious that it has failed when it was most needed, I vote for it to cease to exist as a poitical machine of better nations, and turn its endeavers to something within its reach, there is much humanitarian work to do in the world, stop trying to stop nations from going to war and attack the issues that caused them in the first place.
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 09:48 pm
@markx15,
markx15;4606 wrote:
The UN exists as a project to further unite the world, it obivious that it has failed when it was most needed, I vote for it to cease to exist as a poitical machine of better nations, and turn its endeavers to something within its reach, there is much humanitarian work to do in the world, stop trying to stop nations from going to war and attack the issues that caused them in the first place.
Well said. I concure.
0 Replies
 
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Sep, 2006 09:49 pm
@markx15,
markx15;4606 wrote:
The UN exists as a project to further unite the world, it obivious that it has failed when it was most needed, I vote for it to cease to exist as a poitical machine of better nations, and turn its endeavers to something within its reach, there is much humanitarian work to do in the world, stop trying to stop nations from going to war and attack the issues that caused them in the first place.

Very good post Smile
0 Replies
 
Curmudgeon
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Sep, 2006 05:53 pm
@Amrita cv,
I agree also with Markx15 .
0 Replies
 
Willie cv
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 05:55 pm
@markx15,
markx15;4606 wrote:
The UN exists as a project to further unite the world, it obivious that it has failed when it was most needed, I vote for it to cease to exist as a poitical machine of better nations, and turn its endeavers to something within its reach, there is much humanitarian work to do in the world, stop trying to stop nations from going to war and attack the issues that caused them in the first place.


And replace it with these?

The Despoiling Of America

WorldNetDaily: Treasonous agenda of the Trilateral Commission

Meet The Carlyle Group - Former World Leaders and Washington Insiders Make Billions from the War on Terrorism

The World Bank

WTO | Welcome to the WTO website

These organizations work on behalf of a very few and elite group of wealthy people aimed at lowering wages worldwide and transporting people wherever they want...It will work well into what Bush's goal is for this nation....

North American Union to Replace the USA? by Jerome R. Corsi

Me, I'd rather have a government which represents the majority of the world and protects workers' rights than to have one of the 1% wealthy controlling the lives of the 99% poor.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Sep, 2006 07:38 pm
@Amrita cv,
You sound like a old story we used to hear in the states. I was a little chicken running around crying "the sky is falling",
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Question Mark on United Nations Dignity...
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 05:15:29