The world has changed, eh?
 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/...n-north-korea/

:haha: even north korea can criticize the US about its human rights now
the world has really changed:O:

The only reason the US should be in the UN is the sit on the security counsel and veto everything.

The Allies formed the UN to prevent another major war... and it succeeded... it prevented actions against all the tyrants that sprung up after the war and needed to have their @$$es kicked. :down:

If it wasn't for the UN I imagine the US would be at war with half the planet right now...

I have seldom heard of a greater justification for the UN.

Thanks.:yeah:

You can have that war now... or later

... later being when the other side has far better weapons...

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/2...sternartil.jpg
^Use that for familiarization.

If I remember correctly, those have been in use since WWI, and only international convention and pressure has prevented more widespread use of them.

With a good chance of said weapons to have been designed/manufactured/sold by you or your allies!
:doh::doh::doh::doh: :yep:

.

He who bows to a corrupt authority, becomes either abused or corrupt himself.

His financial policy and his foreign policy are my two main reasons why I am strictly against Obama. On the latter, he is different than Bush and the Neocons - but not one bit less stupid.

The UN should have more teeth when it comes to warlords and dictators.
not sure how I feel about the US, throwing that nutcase hussein was doing the world a favor, but I doubt the liberation of Iraqi people was the intention

The problem there is that the warlords and dictators tend to be backed by someone with uncle Vito

No, the world has not changed, politics have always been absurd

This is the problem the US has with the UN.

We want the UN to have authority over the sovereignty over countries we don't like and the power to stop actions we don't approve of.

However, we don't want the UN to have authority over the sovereignty over countries we do like (including US) and we don't want the UN to have the power to stop actions we approve of.

It really get's tricky when other countries have the same ideas.

The UN was truly perverted when the Nuclear Five were given veto powers in the Security Council. All countries are equal but some are more equal.

The problem was the the Nuclear Five would never have agreed to the UN unless they were given exemptions.

The hypocrisy comes in when people of the United States bitch about how useless the UN is, while the US and the other Nuclear Five do everything in their power to ensure that the UN does not interfere with our respective national and economic agendas.

I support the UN in my profession and I will be the first to admit it is an imperfect organization, but far from useless. People must realize that the UN came into being like a bastard child - half improvised, half compromised.

The question we should be asking is how can the US help the UN in its mission.

If we are not willing to compromise our national and economic agenda in support of the UN, how can we expect other nations to do so?

I question that it is desirable anymore to support the UN, I once have thought different, but I saw myself in need to finally drastically change my mind, so that I would not get out of touch with reality, even if that reality is not what I want. After all, the majority of the UNs' members are criminals, thugs , dictators, and almost all of the minority rest we call the civilised or free or Western or first world - are totally corrupt. Plus the massive influence of business and interest lobbies practicing political influence although in no way being legitimated to do so. Plus the culture clash between Islam and non-Islam. Plus the PC brigade.

There are not only failed states. There are also failed institutions. The UN - is a club of opportunistic abusers. They only differ in their power to abuse.

Or has that veto, do forget that Stalin's Russia and Mao's China were both on the Security Counsel at one time.

That dosn't prevent governments who don't fear the UN from building or using them.

All the more reason we should be able to slap some nasty penalties on such allies and enemies... but they are on the security counsel...

... and if they can do it we have to sell it to our SOBs because it counterbalances what they give to their SOBs.

But it is always the other side that is at fault, right?

We hold these truths to be self evident. :yep: