Hypocrits!!

[langeweile]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4339286.stm

We all said after Rwanda "We will never let this happen again" (Kofi Annan). AGAIN we turn our backs. AGAIN the UN withdraws there people..and AGAIN thousands of children and woman are being slaugthered.

But hey, we can't be the world police..we can't get involved in every countries problem..let them figure it out...

i am sure there is a way we can somehow blame this on the USA...

Ok apologists of this board gather around and find some reasons why we shouldn't get involved.
Which is much easier than to do something about it...

OK I am done bitching...

 

[Cardinal Fang]

But hey, we can't be the world police..we can't get involved in every countries problem..let them figure it out...

i am sure there is a way we can somehow blame this on the USA...

Obviously you're being sarcastic but I want to remind you that everyone is to blame for this mess. Yes....that includes the U.S., Canada, the Europeans and anyone else who is a member of the U.N. for standing by and allowing this to happen. You can't be a member of the U.N. and choose to use it when it serves your political goals and then laugh at it and ridicule it as "out of touch" when it doesn't. That's hypocrisy.

But try to remember this. The reasons behind the involvement must be legitimate. I'm not saying that the human suffering isn't a legitimate reason but honestly, why isn't the Security Council getting involved here? You have to ask yourself that. Why? Because there is nothing in it for them.

Some guy named Gandhi once said:

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?"

 

[markvee]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4339286.stm

We all said after Rwanda "We will never let this happen again" (Kofi Annan). AGAIN we turn our backs. AGAIN the UN withdraws there people..and AGAIN thousands of children and woman are being slaugthered.

But hey, we can't be the world police..we can't get involved in every countries problem..let them figure it out...

i am sure there is a way we can somehow blame this on the USA...

Ok apologists of this board gather around and find some reasons why we shouldn't get involved.
Which is much easier than to do something about it...

OK I am done bitching...

Langeweile, I agree that it is frustrating to see another version of Rwanda happening in Darfur. I can’t fault you for bitching because I’ve done my share as well. I agree that the continued slaughter in Darfur is making the statement, “We will never let this happen again.” into a hypocritical statement.

But should we blame the UN for failing to prevent the slaughter? At least the UN went to Darfur to try and do something. That’s more than you or I have done. Non-essential UN staff are pulling out for the same reason that I wouldn’t go to Darfur in the first place; the risk of getting shot is too great.

I’ve done my share of laying blame on USA on this board, and it’s not entirely fair. I’ve blamed USA for being an arms exporter. USA is not alone. Canada exported bullets to Indonesia, and these bullets were likely used to kill people in the invasion and occupation of East Timor.

I don’t want anymore to blame USA, Canada, or the United Nations. “Don’t hate the players. Hate the game.” The game in this case: Weapons sold to supply people in conflict, weapons sold for peace keeping, profits from weapons sales used to build more weapons to supply people in the next conflict. I don’t think that Canada should buy more weapons for peace keeping, even in the name of defending the defenseless in Darfur. So long as weapons are bought and sold, the cycle of conflict and peace keeping will continue. Rather than buy weapons to keep peace in Darfur, I think that Canada should buy tents to shelter the homeless in South Asia. We can save lives without playing the game.

 

[cyrus]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4339286.stm

......

Ok apologists of this board gather around and find some reasons why we shouldn't get involved.
........

OK I am done bitching...

I thought the most powerful almightily; USA was the world leader, what happen to the leadership qualities that we have seen so many times, so vigorously in the pass, remember IRAQ . . . WMD . . . etc!
Hey if spreading democracy around the world would do anyone good, surly it would be in this god forsaken place full of commies and Islamist terrorist and who knows what else! Don’t you agree?
Oh. . I see blame it on UN ... Right!
No, the UN and its powerful Security Council is simply a Round-table for Nations, it is the responsibility of the membership to make the case and push an agenda and in particular, it is the responsibility of its leadership!
But, I don’t see your beloved leader GWB getting a “Hard On” on this, do you?
Where is his Ricey envoy?
Why isn’t she going on the tour of rich & powerful nations in pursue of happiness and support for unraveling this chaos?

 

[langeweile]

I thought the most powerful almightily; USA was the world leader, what happen to the leadership qualities that we have seen so many times, so vigorously in the pass, remember IRAQ . . . WMD . . . etc!
Hey if spreading democracy around the world would do anyone good, surly it would be in this god forsaken place full of commies and Islamist terrorist and who knows what else! Don’t you agree?
Oh. . I see blame it on UN ... Right!
No, the UN and its powerful Security Council is simply a Round-table for Nations, it is the responsibility of the membership to make the case and push an agenda and in particular, it is the responsibility of its leadership!
But, I don’t see your beloved leader GWB getting a “Hard On” on this, do you?
Where is his Ricey envoy?
Why isn’t she going on the tour of rich & powerful nations in pursue of happiness and support for unraveling this chaos?

i was kinda waiting for Oh Canada, Russia or China to step in. My guess is that without the USA nothing will be happening, and if the USA takes the lead AGAIN, than people like you have a reason to go back on there soapbox.
However while we are cozily sitting round and watching saturday night hockey, probably a few more young kids got killed, a few more mothers and sisters raped and a few more fathers slaughtered.
You just keep going on and push your agenda....hell..whatever helps you to make excuses..nice going cyrus..nice that you show your true colours..

 

[WoodPeckr]

Oil is the Reason

The simple reason is lack of OIL.
If they had Oil, this would never have happened.........
The whole slaughter dynamic/scenario would play out differently....say for instance, like the present Iraqi Model.....

 

[cyrus]

i was kinda waiting for Oh Canada, Russia or China to step in. My guess is that without the USA nothing will be happening, and if the USA takes the lead AGAIN, than people like you have a reason to go back on there soapbox.
However while we are cozily sitting round and watching saturday night hockey, probably a few more young kids got killed, a few more mothers and sisters raped and a few more fathers slaughtered.
You just keep going on and push your agenda....hell..whatever helps you to make excuses..nice going cyrus..nice that you show your true colours..

When was the last time Russia or China stick their nose in other nation’s affairs in our recent memory? (Except within their own backyards)
As for Oh Canada, well. . Generally speaking, we mind our own business however; I could assure you if SC asks, Canada would be more than happy to send what ever few military personnel she has as peace keepers!
As for my true colors, my rant here is the same as yours at least in one point, that is precisely why, I am asking the big Q, where is your beloved leader? The greatest among the great leaders!
Why aren’t you demanding the same from him on Rwanda?
As for me, in this case, I would be the first to lay down the red carpet at front of him on his way to the podium!
But it is not going to happen and we all know more or less the reason!
Speaking of Hypocrisy

 

[Paladin]

Why Should Anyone Care?

If there is nothing to be gained, why should anyone care? It is not a leadership issue. Our leaders should make their decisions on the basis of:
1. National security
2. Economics and furthering business interests
3. Gaining political favour to further either 1 or 2 above

If the idea of using military action can be pitched to the public as a "humanitarian" gesture, then, that's okay. However, the underlying reasons better be for one or all of the 3 points listed above. Committing military resources to stopping the slaughter in Rawanda or any other place means spendig money and putting people in harm's way. The "return on investment" has to be big enough to justify the action. If the return on investment is poor, then let them die. We can look at the situation in a few years time to determine if a better opportunity develops.

 

[cyrus]

If there is nothing to be gained, why should anyone care? It is not a leadership issue. Our leaders should make their decisions on the basis of:
1. National security
2. Economics and furthering business interests
3. Gaining political favour to further either 1 or 2 above

If the idea of using military action can be pitched to the public as a "humanitarian" gesture, then, that's okay. However, the underlying reasons better be for one or all of the 3 points listed above. Committing military resources to stopping the slaughter in Rawanda or any other place means spendig money and putting people in harm's way....

As it may politically sound policy, yeah I sure agree with some of what you have said above but here we are speaking of hypocrisy, particularly those who claim & preach having the moral superiority and righteousness on their side as opposite to political motivations!
A good example could be highlighted in the article below, the fact that the US president is going out of his way so quickly to demand an action on another nation 3000 miles away that may have done something illegal on yet again another nation 3500 miles away!

US demands action on Syria report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4365236.stm

 

[langeweile]

As it may politically sound policy, yeah I sure agree with some of what you have said above but here we are speaking of hypocrisy, particularly those who claim & preach having the moral superiority and righteousness on their side as opposite to political motivations!
A good example could be highlighted in the article below, the fact that the US president is going out of his way so quickly to demand an action on another nation 3000 miles away that may have done something illegal on yet again another nation 3500 miles away!

US demands action on Syria report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4365236.stm

Once again the UN reaction to this document will show how toothless the UN really is.
Without the USA taking the lead and providing money an manpower the UN is just another overhead eating useless goverment institution.
Once again the UN has proven itself to be obsolete. Time to bury that baby.

It must be nice and comfy just sitting by and a) cry that the USA is not doing enough or b) whine that the USA is doing the wrong thing.

AHH the politics of chickens...you can never be wrong...just complain and be happy..

 

[cyrus]

Once again the UN reaction to this document will show how toothless the UN really is.
Without the USA taking the lead and providing money an manpower the UN is just another overhead eating useless goverment institution.
Once again the UN has proven itself to be obsolete. Time to bury that baby.

It must be nice and comfy just sitting by and a) cry that the USA is not doing enough or b) whine that the USA is doing the wrong thing.

AHH the politics of chickens...you can never be wrong...just complain and be happy..

I totally agree, the UN needs some major overhaul not like the stuff USA pushing for!
1- Move the Headquarter to a small neutral country i.e., Marshall Islands, Monaco or even Luxembourg! (Equal access to UN for all members rather than harassment of diplomats by US Immigration while granting VISA permit)
2- Get ride of SC Veto power and make it a democratic Arthurian like round-table (So every one get equal time and equal say and resolutions voted on by consensus of majority)
3-Give the SC / assembly of nations / similar UN institutions judicial rather and political power (Consistent with the UN charter and international laws thus eliminating ominous political aims)
4- Finance it accordingly and fairly i.e., you don’t pay your fees you don't get to talk . . . .

But again, as I‘ve said earlier the UN in its current form is nothing but a political forum for its most powerful SC membership to put forward & push their own agenda. That is what they have done with Iraq and WMD issue, that is what they are doing with Iran and its pursued of uranium enrichment and that is exactly why they can do shit with the occupied territories in the Middle East for over 40+ years!

 

[Peeping Tom]

What purpose would that serve? The UN property is a small, neutral country - it enjoys quasi sovereign status under the treaty that created it. Moving it to the State of Ketchupore wouldn't change anything in terms of its effectiveness.

1- Move the Headquarter to a small neutral country i.e., Marshall Islands, Monaco or even Luxembourg!

Not going to happen. It depends, from time to time, on employing force (apart from spending vast sums in illogical manners), which it doesn't have and can't fund. The great bulk of this brunt comes from SC members. The surest and fastest way to deconstruct the UN is to mention getting rid of SC status.

2- Get ride of SC Veto power and make it a democratic Arthurian like round-table

The UN doesn't rule anything anywhere, therefore the concept of it wielding judicial power makes as much sense as edible uranium. All that it is is a political influence club.

3-Give the SC / assembly of nations / similar UN institutions judicial rather and political power

This I agree with. The US gets hardly any voice compared to its contribution. High time to cut donations to about 0.25 % of the UN budget rather than the current 25 %. Simply, if we are to pay 25 % we should be talking 25 % of the time and not having to hear from endless strings of terrorists, leftists and other such losers.

4- Finance it accordingly and fairly i.e., you don’t pay your fees you don't get to talk . . . .

 

[onthebottom]

UN - democracy for dictators, isn't that special. I think we should withdraw from the UN and kick it up to Toronto, think of all the awsome NY brownstones that would go on the market!

OTB

 

[TOVisitor]

UN - democracy for dictators, isn't that special. I think we should withdraw from the UN and kick it up to Toronto, think of all the awsome NY brownstones that would go on the market!

OTB

OTB:

Your statement kinda reminds me of what Brit Hume said when he heard about the London tube bombings.

He saw it as an investment opportunity. Nice.

 

[onthebottom]

TOV,

Not to mention I'm sure we would get a Trump UN condo project!

LOL

Send the talking theives to YYZ!

OTB

 

[Ranger68]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4339286.stm

We all said after Rwanda "We will never let this happen again" (Kofi Annan). AGAIN we turn our backs. AGAIN the UN withdraws there people..and AGAIN thousands of children and woman are being slaugthered.

But hey, we can't be the world police..we can't get involved in every countries problem..let them figure it out... .

The US vetoed several key resolutions which would have moved troops into Rwanda via UN auspices.
They PREVENTED the UN from acting as the world policeman.
And now, you and they bitch that the UN and the rest of the world community stands by and does nothing.
So, who's the hypocrite?
I don't see the US leaping to action in this case, either.

 

[Ranger68]

Once again the UN reaction to this document will show how toothless the UN really is.
Without the USA taking the lead and providing money an manpower the UN is just another overhead eating useless goverment institution.
Once again the UN has proven itself to be obsolete. Time to bury that baby.

It must be nice and comfy just sitting by and a) cry that the USA is not doing enough or b) whine that the USA is doing the wrong thing.

AHH the politics of chickens...you can never be wrong...just complain and be happy..

I'm sorry - at what point did the US cease being a MEMBER NATION of the UN? And the most important one at that?

Oh yeah - I'll tell you when. When they decided that they wanted to do things their own way and were no longer interested in multilateral discussions.

If the UN has failed, it is the fault of the US, and the US alone.
Period. End of sentence. Rinse and repeat.

 

[langeweile]

The US vetoed several key resolutions which would have moved troops into Rwanda via UN auspices.
.

Maybe you can back this up with facts?

 

[Ranger68]

Maybe you can back this up with facts?

Have you read D'Allaire's Shake Hands with the Devil? He was there, after all.
He lays it all out, my friend. It's very damning.
I can quote, if you like.

 

[langeweile]

Have you read D'Allaire's Shake Hands with the Devil? He was there, after all.
He lays it all out, my friend. It's very damning.
I can quote, if you like.

For the past thirty minutes I was scrolling the UN website to find a history of past vetoes..no luck. I was hoping that you could provide a link to that.

The closest i got was on Sudan.net, there is talk of a veto threat, but no actual report on a veto.