lol...people are actually saying we need to to send in troops to support ethiopia. irony?
This has now become status-quo:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16356501/
Seems the UN can never pick a side.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16356501/
Seems the UN can never pick a side.
Lol.... if we sent people in they'd get eaten.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
lol...people are actually saying we need to to send in troops to support ethiopia. irony?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Come on now... think of what the UN SC is composed of. You won't get 100% agreement among the veto states, let alone everyone else.rawls wrote:
This has now become status-quo:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16356501/
Seems the UN can never pick a side.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Whatever, the Ethiopians werent eating anyway.Mogura wrote:
great ! more money for weapon industry ! and less people to feed !
Malloy must go
motherdear wrote:
send in the marines hehe, but to be serious US, GB and France (they should fix what they screwed up, since they are the primary army of the UN) they should send in the SAS, Green berets and one of the foreign legion special forces in.
No kidding.... population control.PspRpg-7 wrote:
Win win situation. (For those of you who get this, for shame)
You mean like the UN asked them to do?ATG wrote:
Proving the U.N. ineffective once again African forces are doing the right thing by attacking the Islamic extremist that have taken over the country and threatened to destabilize the region.
I think you have trouble understanding a key fact:
THE UN HAS NO MILITARY FORCE WHATSOEVER
It relies entirely upon support from nations with militaries. Any ineffectiveness on the part of the UN is an ineffectiveness on the part of it's members. The UN member with the greatest military expenditure is the US.
GO ETHIOPIA!! Smoke those Islamic radicals!!
I will say this again. . . .the United Nations is an empty suit!!!
The UN is a misguided, misappropriated, mess of ineffective assholes. . . . who's members care more about their limo ride's (the bill goes to US tax payers btw!) to a swank NYC restaurant for lunch, than they do the world's pressing issues!!!
Fuck em' let the UN wreep what they sow! An utterly WORTHLESS bunch of self richeous, miserable pricks!
I will say this again. . . .the United Nations is an empty suit!!!
The UN is a misguided, misappropriated, mess of ineffective assholes. . . . who's members care more about their limo ride's (the bill goes to US tax payers btw!) to a swank NYC restaurant for lunch, than they do the world's pressing issues!!!
Fuck em' let the UN wreep what they sow! An utterly WORTHLESS bunch of self richeous, miserable pricks!
You mean hundreds of millions of dollars in dues are paid and they don't fund any type of military force?Bubbalo wrote:
You mean like the UN asked them to do?ATG wrote:
Proving the U.N. ineffective once again African forces are doing the right thing by attacking the Islamic extremist that have taken over the country and threatened to destabilize the region.
I think you have trouble understanding a key fact:
THE UN HAS NO MILITARY FORCE WHATSOEVER
It relies entirely upon support from nations with militaries. Any ineffectiveness on the part of the UN is an ineffectiveness on the part of it's members. The UN member with the greatest military expenditure is the US.
I think not Bubs.
http://www.gmu.edu/academic/pcs/moller.htm
Im sure you understand that when a country submits designated forces to the UN, they are under the command of the UN and said designated forces carry out orders issued by the UN. I know you are aware of that because you are so worldy for a kid who has never left his parents house. So I guess the lesson here is yes, the U.S. does contribute a majority of the UN forces, but is the UN *aka* all the other countries, who fuck it up. Our military has done just fine there Bubbalo over the years. I just wish Australia would piss us off so we could steamroll your ass and show you.Bubbalo wrote:
You mean like the UN asked them to do?ATG wrote:
Proving the U.N. ineffective once again African forces are doing the right thing by attacking the Islamic extremist that have taken over the country and threatened to destabilize the region.
I think you have trouble understanding a key fact:
THE UN HAS NO MILITARY FORCE WHATSOEVER
It relies entirely upon support from nations with militaries. Any ineffectiveness on the part of the UN is an ineffectiveness on the part of it's members. The UN member with the greatest military expenditure is the US.
Malloy must go
what does the UN ever do besides say that the two sides should talk more? If they send in a military it won't do anything to help Ethiopia, and if they don't send in the military then they'll just complain.MOGADISHU, Somalia - The top U.N. envoy in Somalia urged the U.N. Security Council to call for an immediate cease-fire between Ethiopian forces backing Somalia's weak government and the powerful Islamic militia that controls most of the country, saying talks are the only way to solve the conflict.
its a worthless organization that should be kicked out of the US
Amen! The UN is a pile of Saddam Husseins cum stained jail socks!Blehm98 wrote:
what does the UN ever do besides say that the two sides should talk more? If they send in a military it won't do anything to help Ethiopia, and if they don't send in the military then they'll just complain.MOGADISHU, Somalia - The top U.N. envoy in Somalia urged the U.N. Security Council to call for an immediate cease-fire between Ethiopian forces backing Somalia's weak government and the powerful Islamic militia that controls most of the country, saying talks are the only way to solve the conflict.
its a worthless organization that should be kicked out of the US
Hmmmm wonder who is selling the guns to both sides?ATG wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5051588.stm
Islamic Courts Union .
Interesting to note which countries sponcer these guys.
LOL, Oh well another stupid ass war that the US is going to get involved in, and ultimately put us another 4 trillion dollars in debt.ATG wrote:
http://i14.tinypic.com/2e563k7.jpg
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1818297.htm
Islamic forces in retreat.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 2FShowFull
Go Ethiopia.
Proving the U.N. ineffective once again African forces are doing the right thing by attacking the Islamic extremist that have taken over the country and threatened to destabilize the region.
The war is over basically Ethiopia has gotten all the way to Mogadishu.
They cant afford a basketball.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Are they trying to set a record for "Poorest Countries to Ever War Against Each Other"? Why don't they just play a game of basketball?
They can use the severed heads of those who don't pray five times a day to Allah.
no the UN spends money on things like food and education for the poor majority of the world but, hey we might as well give them weapons.ATG wrote:
You mean hundreds of millions of dollars in dues are paid and they don't fund any type of military force?Bubbalo wrote:
You mean like the UN asked them to do?ATG wrote:
Proving the U.N. ineffective once again African forces are doing the right thing by attacking the Islamic extremist that have taken over the country and threatened to destabilize the region.
I think you have trouble understanding a key fact:
THE UN HAS NO MILITARY FORCE WHATSOEVER
It relies entirely upon support from nations with militaries. Any ineffectiveness on the part of the UN is an ineffectiveness on the part of it's members. The UN member with the greatest military expenditure is the US.
I think not Bubs.
http://www.gmu.edu/academic/pcs/moller.htm
Sorry forgot.ATG wrote:
They can use the severed heads of those who don't pray five times a day to Allah.
Maybe if it gets out of hand they should send in the AU.
What are they fighting each other with?? Rocks and sticks?? Can either side even afford guns??
They should just send in the Badgers.
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/badgers2/
(Not that that really helps or as any relevance to this debate, but hey, i like badgers)
They should just send in the Badgers.
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/badgers2/
(Not that that really helps or as any relevance to this debate, but hey, i like badgers)
SU-27s I think and MiG-21s.SwampDog wrote:
What are they fighting each other with?? Rocks and sticks?? Can either side even afford guns??
Last edited by Bertster7 (2006-12-28 09:18:39)
which side gets called the "Skinnys"???
What is this supposed to accomplish? Isn't bringing more war to a war-torn country kind of counter-intuitive?