BF2S Forums What's the verdict on the UN's outgoing Kofi Annan?

TeamZephyr wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

TeamZephyr wrote:

The world is seriously screwed up when someone with morality and an idea on how we can build a better world is booed out of office while a warmonger can be celebrated by millions and elected twice.

YAh and its even worse when people celebrate and admire that asshat in Iran on this forum too isnt it? Whatever.

Really? Name me some people on this forum that "admire" and "celebrate" that dickhead in charge of Iran.

In all your anti-UN posted you've failed to properly address the two main problems with the UN.

1. The veto powers of the security council. It's time they got rid of that so that the US or France can't just say "No" when they don't like something.

2. People not obeying resolutions. Two of the main states that don't obey UN resolutions are Israel and the United States, so a big part of the problem is that you don't go with what the UN works. It needs the larger nations such as the US to obey the rules, then it works. Delibrately trying to undermine the UN then bitch about it is cowardice.

And here is a +1 for you.

TeamZephyr wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

TeamZephyr wrote:

The world is seriously screwed up when someone with morality and an idea on how we can build a better world is booed out of office while a warmonger can be celebrated by millions and elected twice.

YAh and its even worse when people celebrate and admire that asshat in Iran on this forum too isnt it? Whatever.

Really? Name me some people on this forum that "admire" and "celebrate" that dickhead in charge of Iran.

In all your anti-UN posted you've failed to properly address the two main problems with the UN.

1. The veto powers of the security council. It's time they got rid of that so that the US or France can't just say "No" when they don't like something.

2. People not obeying resolutions. Two of the main states that don't obey UN resolutions are Israel and the United States, so a big part of the problem is that you don't go with what the UN works. It needs the larger nations such as the US to obey the rules, then it works. Delibrately trying to undermine the UN then bitch about it is cowardice.

I did touch on the veto issue in an earlier reply. There are a couple here that DO tout how good Whats his nitz is and have pictures of him in there sigs. Weather its just in bad taste or they really do likwe the guy, It personally makes me sick to see his face.

  We dont obey sanctions?????? Ok YAh, So we are the ones that are sending missle parts  to Iran, the US wasnt messing with the oil for food program and making money and exploiting loopholes and crap. Again, im NOT totally anti UN, i feel it needs a overhaul and I would like the thankless SOB's to be moved OFF of US soil.  Ill elaborate more hopefully when im done with all my doctors appointments and crap i have this week.

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

TeamZephyr wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

YAh and its even worse when people celebrate and admire that asshat in Iran on this forum too isnt it? Whatever.

Really? Name me some people on this forum that "admire" and "celebrate" that dickhead in charge of Iran.

In all your anti-UN posted you've failed to properly address the two main problems with the UN.

1. The veto powers of the security council. It's time they got rid of that so that the US or France can't just say "No" when they don't like something.

2. People not obeying resolutions. Two of the main states that don't obey UN resolutions are Israel and the United States, so a big part of the problem is that you don't go with what the UN works. It needs the larger nations such as the US to obey the rules, then it works. Delibrately trying to undermine the UN then bitch about it is cowardice.

I did touch on the veto issue in an earlier reply. There are a couple here that DO tout how good Whats his nitz is and have pictures of him in there sigs. Weather its just in bad taste or they really do likwe the guy, It personally makes me sick to see his face.

  We dont obey sanctions?????? Ok YAh, So we are the ones that are sending missle parts  to Iran, the US wasnt messing with the oil for food program and making money and exploiting loopholes and crap. Again, im NOT totally anti UN, i feel it needs a overhaul and I would like the thankless SOB's to be moved OFF of US soil.  Ill elaborate more hopefully when im done with all my doctors appointments and crap i have this week.

What about all the missing billions of dollars from the "reconstruction" of Iraq? what did your president try to do? oh that's right push it through very sneakily before the midterms that the body that investigates such things would be closed down, only, it was caught.. people in Glass houses and all that jazz

TeamZephyr wrote:

The world is seriously screwed up when someone with morality and an idea on how we can build a better world is booed out of office while a warmonger can be celebrated by millions and elected twice.

BUAHAHAHAHAHAAA!  He thinks Kofi Annan has morality!  Oil for food scandal anyone?

So from what i've read so far the second any criticism falls on the United States its basically equates to blind hate there. Kofi did a good job with what he could and his remarks towards the US are will placed and not out of line.

The UN can't do anything about Sudan without the governments consent to send forces in, its a concept called sovereignty. Kinda like when the UN didn't want the United States to go into Iraq, but it went in anyway. That's called a violation of sovereignty.

So...Headstone...buddy...friend you do know the history of the US and its relationship with Iraq right? So you would know all about how we armed him then went on to "disarm" them, doesn't that strike you as a bit odd? Why would you arm an enemy oh wait i know you arm them before they are enemies just so you know what you are up against that's bloody brilliant, but like i said before the US invaded a country...violated the UN charter and somehow you think its in the right? How do you come to that conclusion? lol does the COALITION OF THE WILLING sound that bad ass to you or have you checked this COALITIONS makeup...haha its a joke

Well, I think we can add this to the ever growing list of things where Americans disagree with everyone else in the world.

So by that same logic, say a genius programmer was also a child-molester, or a brilliant artist was an abusive alcoholic, or a brilliant statesman was cheating on his wife...do we trash the code and start over, tear up paintings, or reverse good policy?  No, we take the works...in this case an oration...at face value.  For some reason this logic is impaired in the face of politics though, advocating basic humanity - which was Mr. Annan's message - is being traunced by yet another swiftboat smear machine as being an attack on King and Country...I mean...our president and nation.  Someone's personal corruption does not impune in any way a good message or the fact that even without a perfect record he has been a good statesman and against an illegal war of aggression from the start, holding a firm belief that sanctions only hurt the poor of a country they target, or in the absence of this, trying to set up a program for Iraq to benefit from oil by giving them basic goods so over a million children and underclass citizens wouldn't starve.

If you want to attack the man himself for his views, read a little more and realize the source of the charges leveled against him.  His crime was setting up a system where Saddam was allowed to basically take (relatively...few million here, few million there, sooner or later you're talking real money...) small personal kickbacks to trade oil for famine relief.  Saddam was more than happy to infuriate American big oil by refusing to do business with them.  Annan's son was with a Swiss firm that was inspecting the goods being sent to Iraq...far from making him or his offspring guilty of anything.

What he was guilty of was pissing off American big oil and stating his horror at the bad diplomatic joke which was the American run-up to the Iraq invasion.  So he gets a slap in the face from "neo-con" research foundations like the Heritage group, and from PNAC with their pushing of Jon "The UN sucks balls" Bolton to the unconfirmed post of US embassador to the UN.

PS...

Not easy to swallow something from a guy whom was ousted as being involved in the oil for food scandal.

First, Oil for Food was a program, not a scandal.  It became a scandal after Exxon and Texaco set some attack dogs, think tanks, and congressional lobbyists on the case and the most they could dig up was "his kid works for the Swiss".  Second, "ousted" means kicked out.  Nobody else but the American conservative attack dogs took this as anything more than it was, he was never in danger of being "ousted" let alone actually removed from any post.  As with anything you choose to "swallow"...trust, BUT verify the source.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2006-12-14 06:50:26)

I think that some of these conservatives just don't know how to deal with criticism. Akin to sticking fingers in ears and crying 'NAA NAA NAA'

http://www.polianna.com/2005/05/8.Debun … nnan.shtml

A few Annan accomplishments:

-Putting the UN Books in order. (David Plotz, “Surprise!  A decent U.N. secretary-general,” Slate.com, March 1, 1998)

- Helping resolve the statement between Libya and the Security Council. (The Norwegian Nobel Committee, “Nobel Peace Prize 2001,” October 12, 2001)

- Putting together the international response to East Timor. (The Norwegian Nobel Committee, “Nobel Peace Prize 2001,” October 12, 2001)

- Proposing the Global AIDS and Health Fund, which raised $1.5 billion within eight months. (The Norwegian Nobel Committee, “Nobel Peace Prize 2001,” October 12, 2001)

More on Annan’s accomplishments:

Under Annan, the UN has greatly increased its use of modern communications and he has pushed the organization to be more open and accountable. In 1999 the UN released major reports on disasters in Rwanda and Srebrenica, assessments that were painfully self-critical and set a new standard for UN evaluation and transparency. Annan is credited with promotion of women to higher posts in the organization. And he will likely be remembered for his effective management and personal diplomacy, and his warmth and charm in even the most difficult international crises.  (Phyliss Bennis, “Kofi Annan: Biographical Note,” Global Policy Forum)

To my own discredit I actually had to look these up.  I just know that he and the rest of the UN was effectively knee-capped by the neo-cons since they took office in 2000.

Last edited by GorillaTicTacs (2006-12-15 00:32:50)

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

http://www.polianna.com/2005/05/8.DebunkerKofiAnnan.shtml

A few Annan accomplishments:

-Putting the UN Books in order. (David Plotz, “Surprise!  A decent U.N. secretary-general,” Slate.com, March 1, 1998)

- Helping resolve the statement between Libya and the Security Council. (The Norwegian Nobel Committee, “Nobel Peace Prize 2001,” October 12, 2001)

- Putting together the international response to East Timor. (The Norwegian Nobel Committee, “Nobel Peace Prize 2001,” October 12, 2001)

- Proposing the Global AIDS and Health Fund, which raised $1.5 billion within eight months. (The Norwegian Nobel Committee, “Nobel Peace Prize 2001,” October 12, 2001)

More on Annan’s accomplishments:

Under Annan, the UN has greatly increased its use of modern communications and he has pushed the organization to be more open and accountable. In 1999 the UN released major reports on disasters in Rwanda and Srebrenica, assessments that were painfully self-critical and set a new standard for UN evaluation and transparency. Annan is credited with promotion of women to higher posts in the organization. And he will likely be remembered for his effective management and personal diplomacy, and his warmth and charm in even the most difficult international crises.  (Phyliss Bennis, “Kofi Annan: Biographical Note,” Global Policy Forum)

To my own discredit I actually had to look these up.  I just know that he and the rest of the UN was effectively knee-capped by the neo-cons since they took office in 2000.

First post, so I expect a flame, but I don't really see most of these as a Sec-Gen's function. The Global AIDS and Health Fund should have been done as a part of the WHO. Putting the books in order would be more an accounting function, wouldn't it? The response in Timor and resolution with Lybia are his functions, but the major reports about Rwanda and Srebrenica SHOULD have been released and should have been EXTREMELY self critical. Both of those were mishandled by everyone involved.

I really don't understand the effective management and personal diplomacy because the only reason that no one could really flame Kofi was because he didn't really take a stand on anything (Flaming of the US excluded, of course). He hemmed and hawwed until someone else would take a stand and then say "Yeah, let's do that" or "I don't think that would be good".

In all I would say that Kofi did great things for the UN, but that the UN hasn't really served its purpose anytime recently. Basically, the person who said that the last great thing they did was the coalition for the Gulf War. The resolution at the end of that war lacked teeth, and, other than the press conferences) would anyone have noticed if they hadn't been around the last couple years?

Edit: Back on topic, I think his remarks were out of place given his standing, but that he wasn't wrong in the content

Last edited by WoSL ChemWarrior (2006-12-15 05:50:18)

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

The UN is only as effective as the power the member states grant to it.  The US has been systematically pulling out of its supposed UN obligations since its inception, with a massive acceleration of this when Bush Jr. took office.  As far as Kofi, I'm not saying he was great, just that he made some good points and did what he could do as a lame duck, looks like mostly just cleaning house...it's not like he banged an intern or anything, so don't get all ruffle-feathered.

Not ruffled, not sure why Kofi was a lame duck. As a former member of the military that was in Bosnia twice as part of a UN peacekeeping force, I disagree that we have been pulling out of our obligations to the UN until the current situation. I know it shouldnt matter, but my current thoughts are that the action in Iraq was poorly planned, used a national tragedy as a lame excuse, and was long overdue. I know how conflicting that sounds, but yes, Iraq was a soverign country. One that violated numerous UN resolutions and cease fire agreements. Also, the only soverign country in recent history that used chemical weapons against its own citizens. That in itself should have caused a UN sanctioned removal from power. But thats obviously a different topic.

Libertarian (and classic conservative) view - The UN is a socialist construct and is the key to world government and control of the masses.  It wishes for taxation without representation and possible foreign intervention in domestic affairs.

A bit extreme, but not something I can argue with

Neo-Con view - The UN is a liberal construct that stands in the way of a new American century.  It can be a useful tool to springboard US foreign policy, but for the most part it is cumbersome and can be safely ignored when necessary.

No arguement here

Progressive view - The UN is the key to lasting peace in the world and a forum for the whole world to come together in sharing for greater mutual prosperity and the solving of problems on a world basis.

Here we have some issues. This might hold true in a perfect world, but not in ours. No single group, even with an international sanction, will be able to do this. It's just unrealistic.

Far-right Whacko view - The UN is a Jewish/Elitist conspiracy that was born for the sole purpose of empowering Israel and use by the Clintonites for disarming America and using foreign troops to occupy American soil.

I think I personally like this one, just because it makes for interesting dinner conversation...