1
   

Walk Away From The U.N.

 
 
Skye cv
 
Reply Thu 14 Jun, 2007 07:00 am
Walk away from the United Nations -- The Washington Times
Op-Editorial

Walk away from the United Nations
By Nat Hentoff
June 4, 2007

If a university were to grant Robert Mugabe an honorary degree in human rights, land reform and economic development, it would lose every shred of credibility. Yet on May 11, the United Nations, with so little credibility of its own, actually squandered more of it when Zimbabwe, ravaged by its dictator, was voted the chair of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development -- specializing in economic land and rural development -- as well as the environment.
Astonished, The Economist magazine (May 19) noted that Zimbabwe, once known as "the breadbasket of Africa," has had its agriculture "largely destroyed by its government's catastrophic policies." This year, it was Africa's turn to lead the Commission on Sustainable Development, and the U.N.'s African members shamefully and inexcusably support Mugabe's government for that post.
Zimbabwe is a disaster area. The country's own Social Welfare Commission, as reported by The New York Times on Dec. 19, found that 63 percent of the rural population and 53 percent of the urban population cannot meet basic food requirements.
Under Mr. Mugabe's rule, Zimbabwe's inflation is the highest on the planet: more than 2,200 percent.
The African nations voting to bestow "legitimacy" on Mr. Mugabe's terrorism against his own people closed their eyes and consciences to the fact as reported by The Economist that "every day desperate Zimbabweans cross the Limpopo River, braving crocodiles and occasionally drowning, to try their luck in neighboring South Africa. Trapped into illegality there, many are exploited and abused." Meanwhile, the liberator of Zimbabwe from white rule into its present wasteland is planning a 2008 campaign for an additional six-year term and a $4 million museum (a "shrine") of his lifetime achievements (Washington Times, May 2).
Mr. Mugabe will surely win, if not by acclamation then certainly through long-practiced intimidation. In May, for example, he forbade Zimbabwe journalists -- those who still risk beatings and prison for reporting the truth -- from marching in commemoration of World Press Freedom Day (New York Times, May 7).
While the United Nations elevates Mr. Mugabe to alert the world on vital issues of sustainable development, Christopher Dell, who is ending a three-year assignment as U.S. ambassador to Zimbabwe, gave National Public Radio (May 15) his assessment of the living hell Mr. Mugabe has created: "The metaphor I have is that it is like a lake. And as the waters of the lake recede, more and more of the fish are being left to die in the mud. At the center, the big fish are swimming around nicely and making huge fortunes, huge fortunes."
Metaphor turns into reality in this Dec. 17 dispatch by Erik German of Newsday from Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe: "A few miles south from empty luxury hotels in this once dazzling tourist spot, dozens of gaunt young men survive by scavenging food from the town dump. Alan Sibanda, 23, has been coming here... for the past five years, scuffling with baboons and vultures for the least-rotten scraps. Since midsummer, garbage has been his main source of food." I guess the U.N. members who voted to honor Mr. Mugabe by making Zimbabwe the head of the Commission on Sustainable Development didn't bother to interview Mr. Sibanda before the final ballot.
To cap the current (and chronic) disgrace of the United Nations, guess who the new officers of the U.N. Disarmament Commission are? The chair is Syria, home of abundantly armed warring factions, and the vice chair, believe it or not, is Iran, the leading prospect to blow up its region of the world. Having this proud stoker of nuclear destruction become second-in-command of the U.N. Disarmament Commission is like springing Jack Abramoff from prison to fill the new vacancy at the World Bank.
In one of its series of editorials, "Your U.N. at Work," the May 19-20 Wall Street Journal said: "It's a shame the U.S. didn't respond to the outcome of these two 'leadership' elections (including Zimbabwe heading the Development Commission) and walk away from both of these useless U.N. outfits." It makes much more sense for us to walk away from the United Nations itself, period. There are other organizations that with more help from us and other concerned nations can feed the hungry and provide medical aid for those in need around the world. But Eleanor Roosevelt's dream of the United Nations serving as an international beacon of human rights has become a nightmare of millions of people's betrayed hopes.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,551 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jun, 2007 09:38 am
@Skye cv,
We can't just walk away. The UN has a long and very compelling history. We must stay involved to some extent. Our WOT takes priority, however. Unpopularity in the UN is something we must accept and contend with for years to come.
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jun, 2007 02:59 pm
@Skye cv,
The UN is corrupt garbage. And a "long history" relative to what? I mayflys lifespan?
Red cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jun, 2007 07:54 pm
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;21196 wrote:
The UN is corrupt garbage. And a "long history" relative to what? I mayflys lifespan?



Yes it is, controled by China and Islamic countries that don't vote for themselves as slave traders and abusers of human rights. The Dufar crisis would of been dealt with but of course China and the Islamic Countries don't consider the genocide of "Darkies" albeit Muslim Darkies as genocide so they vote for no intervention until the oil lines and the innocents are dealt with. Have they no shame, no they don't but the US is the usual scape goat if all else fails blame Bush.
0 Replies
 
Skye cv
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Jun, 2007 08:40 pm
@Skye cv,
The U.N. has become a mockery of human rights issues promoting abuse, theft, genocide and dictatorships.

There is nothing of worth saving.
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jun, 2007 09:09 am
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;21196 wrote:
The UN is corrupt garbage. And a "long history" relative to what? I mayflys lifespan?


No, Young Gun. No. It was first proposed by WOODROW WILSON, after WWI, in the form of the League of Nations, to promote world peace and prevent the slaughter-fest the war represented. The U.S. refused to join, fearing its participation would curb its rapidly accelerating global power. Then, thanks to APPEASEMENT FREAKS (please don't take this personally, even though I can understand how you might) in the Western democratic world, HITLER CAME TO POWER, MURDERED 45 MILLION PEOPLE, and almost destroyed Western Civilization. It was after THAT debacle, that the Allies got serious and established the U.N. in the immediate aftermath of the world's worst blood-bath. The U.N. was established in the U.S. and has been headquartered here ever since. Be, know, do. :devilheadbang:
0 Replies
 
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jun, 2007 09:41 am
@Skye cv,
I know all about the UN, and when it was created, by who, and why, the failed LoN and I also know that they have embraced every communist leader since their inception, and commited MANY acts that would have normal world leaders swinging from the end of a rope. And 50ish years is NOT a "long history".
socalgolfguy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jun, 2007 09:48 am
@Skye cv,
Skye;21259 wrote:
The U.N. has become a mockery of human rights issues promoting abuse, theft, genocide and dictatorships.

There is nothing of worth saving.


:beat:
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jun, 2007 10:53 am
@92b16vx,
92b16vx;21312 wrote:
I know all about the UN, and when it was created, by who, and why, the failed LoN and I also know that they have embraced every communist leader since their inception, and commited MANY acts that would have normal world leaders swinging from the end of a rope. And 50ish years is NOT a "long history".


It is when you consider that the 20th Century was Man's most destructive century. We are still living the consequences of every single capital event of the 20th Century, and will be for another 100 years. It's also a long history when you consider the relative youth of the United States. 231 years just isn't very old. Sorry.

Yes....we have to be strong and decisive. But, we must also at times wear the mask of Internationalism. It's a matter of strategy and tactics, not altruism. :devilheadbang:
92b16vx
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Jun, 2007 10:17 pm
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;21338 wrote:
It is when you consider that the 20th Century was Man's most destructive century. We are still living the consequences of every single capital event of the 20th Century, and will be for another 100 years. It's also a long history when you consider the relative youth of the United States. 231 years just isn't very old. Sorry.

Yes....we have to be strong and decisive. But, we must also at times wear the mask of Internationalism. It's a matter of strategy and tactics, not altruism. :devilheadbang:


Did you ever see me say America is old? America is an infant compared to some nations. Hell I stayed in a hotel in Germany that is older than America.
0 Replies
 
Pinochet73
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 07:08 am
@Skye cv,
What about the women? Were they that old, too? Just curious (old pervert here).
0 Replies
 
Skye cv
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 07:29 am
@Skye cv,
I apologize for my outlandish thoughts .... I have never shared them and I believe the group here can debate them out of my head with argument and reason.

The United Nations and the concept under which it was formed was admirable at the time, however in this world we now reside, it is an impossible dynamic - there will never again in our world be unanimity of nations - only the strong with threatening weapons at their disposal and the 'victim' nations who suck the lifeblood out of others.

Never again will there be exploration and conquering - only annihilation of nations by another with a stronger military and long distance weaponry - or far worse those who use science to wipe out vast populations such as China now seems to be attempting with their crappy exports of toxic toys and food product.

I think diplomacy is forever gone as an instrument of peace - and as a matter of fact I hesitate to say this but I believe peace will never be reached. There will always be battles for power and wealth and other desires by mad leaders bent on taking what they wish from another group.

I submit disbanding the U.N. - it has become an expensive pretense - much as monarchies represent - and it is time to become realistic regarding where our money is being flung - into waste and rhetorical con jobs, or into positive forward motion for our own nation -

It is time for the United States to reclaim itself for our future.
0 Replies
 
socalgolfguy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 10:09 am
@Skye cv,
Well spoken. I also think they are all self serving empty suits. But, realistically, they are never going to disband. Unfortunately, it may take generations to fix the endemic cancer within the organization, especially if Bill Clinton gets his lifelong dream of secretary generalship of the club.
0 Replies
 
Skye cv
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 12:14 pm
@Skye cv,
Hi SoCal

I understand what you write is true .... I only ask people to think on this:

"What has the U.N. done for the U.S. in say the last ten years?"

"What have they done to the U.S. as a nation in the last ten years?"

They have chided late payment dues from the U.S. but never reinburse for the military 'exercises' conducted for them - and the costly mission between the two Koreas at the DMZ.

In monetary value alone it should be enough to suggest they take their toys and move out.

The real estate would benefit - Trump did an exploratory bid on revamping and updating their building a few years ago - he went in with a figure about one quarter less than what they have awarded another architectural firm...

Millions it is going to cost! Who? You and me.
0 Replies
 
socalgolfguy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 12:40 pm
@Skye cv,
SKYE

Agreed. Imagine that at birth, we are given a pair of peanuts. As we grow to maturity, so too, do our peanuts, to become walnuts. What we do with them after that is entirely up to us. We decide either to settle for walnuts, grow them to coconuts or shrink back to peanuts.

Which do you prefer?

Isn't it ironic that Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer...?
0 Replies
 
Red cv
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 06:57 pm
@Skye cv,
What really makes me angry at the UN is they allow China, Russia and a host of Islamic Countries to hyjack votes on democatic freedoms and human rights issues. None of the Islamic Countries allow a modicum of equality regarding human rights and in most cases they are the most violent offenders but because they sit on the UN they get a "Get out of jail card free" and yet the death of innocents continue. How can anyone respect this institution when it's members are some of the globes worst scum?????????????????? They remind me of the Quebec Mafioso, rich powerful and not an ounce of honour or deceny but it's they who decide the path innocents will take. A bloody greed filled path of unimaginable barbarity and cruelty. They are a model of why the rich and powerful should not be allowed into "Positions" that require morals because most of the UN members have noneeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
0 Replies
 
One Man Clan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Jun, 2007 11:48 pm
@Pinochet73,
Pinochet73;21137 wrote:
We can't just walk away. The UN has a long and very compelling history.


...

Long?

Compelling?

No.

Quote:
We must stay involved to some extent.


No, we shouldn't.

Quote:
Our WOT takes priority, however. Unpopularity in the UN is something we must accept and contend with for years to come.


No it's not.

Ron Paul for Prez!
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 10:14 am
@Skye cv,
I don't think Ron Paul has a chance.
One Man Clan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 10:52 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline;21765 wrote:
I don't think Ron Paul has a chance.


Me either.

But I still support him.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Jun, 2007 10:53 am
@Skye cv,
Alot of people seem to as well.
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. » Walk Away From The U.N.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 05:42:30