The United Nations shares blame for the war in Iraq.
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlene … amp;rpc=22
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlene … amp;rpc=22
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
What a joke the UN is.
Ahhh yes. The UN FTL. Again. What a surprise.
Seriously, has this organization ever done any good?
Seriously, has this organization ever done any good?
If the U.N. hadn't been threatening outta one side of the mouth, and taking bribes out of the other we may never have gone there.
Corrupt bastards were perfectly content to take the money while Saddams oil went to build palaces and fund suicide bombers.
And then they cry foul when we try to put an end to everything.
Disgusting.
Corrupt bastards were perfectly content to take the money while Saddams oil went to build palaces and fund suicide bombers.
And then they cry foul when we try to put an end to everything.
Disgusting.
Exactly, ATG. UN is worthless.
And its not even a very good joke. We get screwed twice.usmarine2007 wrote:
What a joke the UN is.
The UN is a redundant talkshop.
I have to agree with ya here, the UN is a model of failure. They just need to disband it or severly overhaul it, but I doubt that will ever happen. It's a shame we can't just invade it, lol.
They make great use of the UN whenever motions against the human rights record of Israel are lodged.... but when they aren't getting oil-for-food kickbacks they start crying and stamping their feet.m3thod wrote:
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-16 12:07:20)
Tru datCameronPoe wrote:
They make great use of the UN whenever motions against the human rights record of Israel are lodged.... but when they aren't getting oil-for-food kickbacks they start crying and stamping their feet.m3thod wrote:
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
The UN is one of those good "ideas" that doesn't work.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-16 12:25:47)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
How touchingly UNanimous...
But I disagree with y'all. Inefficient? Yes. Corrupt? Yes.
Necessary? You betcha.
But I disagree with y'all. Inefficient? Yes. Corrupt? Yes.
Necessary? You betcha.
If it's inefficient and corrupt it become unnecessary in my opinion.
As is the UK, but lets just focus on the US, right?m3thod wrote:
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
Ya the UN never misses a chance to condemn Israel.CameronPoe wrote:
They make great use of the UN whenever motions against the human rights record of Israel are lodged.... but when they aren't getting oil-for-food kickbacks they start crying and stamping their feet.m3thod wrote:
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
I wonder why?JG1567JG wrote:
Ya the UN never misses a chance to condemn Israel.CameronPoe wrote:
They make great use of the UN whenever motions against the human rights record of Israel are lodged.... but when they aren't getting oil-for-food kickbacks they start crying and stamping their feet.m3thod wrote:
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
That's a valid point, of course. But then, if you deem every inefficient and corrupt organisation unnecessary, you're not left with much, are you?Stingray24 wrote:
If it's inefficient and corrupt it become unnecessary in my opinion.
For instance, let's compare the efficiency of UN peacekeeping vs. US peacekeeping from a fiscal point of view:
According to a recent study, a US-run peacekeeping operation is twice as expensive as a UN-run operation.
QFTbob_6012 wrote:
I have to agree with ya here, the UN is a model of failure. They just need to disband it or severly overhaul it, but I doubt that will ever happen. It's a shame we can't just invade it, lol.
We could always just kick them out, arrest everyone that doesn't pay their parking/speeding tickets, and turn the building into waterfront condos. I'd live there, they have an awesome view.
The difference is that the U.S. gets things done. The U.N. just pretends.apollo_fi wrote:
That's a valid point, of course. But then, if you deem every inefficient and corrupt organisation unnecessary, you're not left with much, are you?Stingray24 wrote:
If it's inefficient and corrupt it become unnecessary in my opinion.
For instance, let's compare the efficiency of UN peacekeeping vs. US peacekeeping from a fiscal point of view:
According to a recent study, a US-run peacekeeping operation is twice as expensive as a UN-run operation.
Getting things done is more expensive than expoiting the situation, which is a lot of what the U.N. is all about.
The UN sucks, they need to make it better. It has good ideas and intentions but either no way of executing them or a very ineffiecent way.
The UN is an EMPTY SUIT!
As I have said many times before, it needs to be disbanded and re-created with a more proper mission. As it stands today, the UN is a terribly corrupted and ineffective organization.
As I have said many times before, it needs to be disbanded and re-created with a more proper mission. As it stands today, the UN is a terribly corrupted and ineffective organization.
Correct. Recent UN failures are 99.9% directly attributed to the Great Satan.Pug wrote:
As is the UK, but lets just focus on the US, right?m3thod wrote:
Of course it does. The US is an integral member of the UN.
Last edited by m3thod (2007-01-16 13:33:16)
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Like religion?Stingray24 wrote:
If it's inefficient and corrupt it become unnecessary in my opinion.
The U.N. does do more than just 'pretend'. It has a solid track record in nation-building:ATG wrote:
The difference is that the U.S. gets things done. The U.N. just pretends.apollo_fi wrote:
That's a valid point, of course. But then, if you deem every inefficient and corrupt organisation unnecessary, you're not left with much, are you?Stingray24 wrote:
If it's inefficient and corrupt it become unnecessary in my opinion.
For instance, let's compare the efficiency of UN peacekeeping vs. US peacekeeping from a fiscal point of view:
According to a recent study, a US-run peacekeeping operation is twice as expensive as a UN-run operation.
Getting things done is more expensive than expoiting the situation, which is a lot of what the U.N. is all about.
Namibia 1989–1990
El Salvador 1991–1996
Mozambique 1992–1994
Eastern Slavonia 1995–1998
East Timor 1999–present
These are examples of UN-led peacekeeping and nation-building efforts that have been successful. Read more in the source document.