Should the UN be called in to observe US elections?

[Tr0n]

congressmen are calling for UN intervention ..not the UN

He has a point there...but it's not all of congress.

 

[^Ben]

Heck who cares.

Aslong as it's not bush

Kerry seems much better and Clinton was a good president.

 

[CptStern]

I hear enough criticism from US media thank-you. I live in the freakin country when the 2000 elections happened. Trust me, the US media is, has and will criticize the US groverment. I hear about US soldiers dieing in Iraq everyday of the week on the news. I don't need to hear some the news from somebody from another country saying that the US media can't properly critize the US. The US media has specific nuances about how it does its criticism. Trust me, even the staunchest supporters of Bush have heard about the shortfalls and criticisms as president. It may not be apparent to people in other countries, but it is apparent to people who live in the United States.

I get all the US media giants, as well as the BBC CBC and other world news media and I can rightfully say the US media paints a decidingly different picture of the war in iraq than any other nation. CNN is so full of "a soldier's life" stories with little to no examination of the issues involved. Seriously watch the BBC sometime or CBC ...it's almost as if they are covering a whole different war

[Edit]: CptStern, your original link doesn't work. Anyways, 9 congressmen is nothing. I'm sure you can easily get more congressman to support taking over some random country (like Canada ) than having the UN come in and observe the elections.

just look it up, it's all over the news

now why would anyone want to invade canada? ...we're actually liked

 

[Tr0n]

I would invade canada....j00r b33r is mine!!!

 

[CptStern]

meh you wouldnt know what to do with it ...one beer and yer on the floor ...US beer is like water compared to canadian beer

In case you can't tell, this topic really steams me. Maybe because I am a cocky American. Or I have pride for my country. Or I hate the UN. Take your pick.

Pride? or blind patriotism? (as in I will stand by my country no matter what they do)why do you hate the UN ...I hate mondays, I hate celine dion but hating the UN makes no sense

 

[blahblahblah]

I get all the US media giants, as well as the BBC CBC and other world news media and I can rightfully say the US media paints a decidingly different picture of the war in iraq than any other nation. CNN is so full of "a soldier's life" stories with little to no examination of the issues involved. Seriously watch the BBC sometime or CBC ...it's almost as if they are covering a whole different war

Have you ever thought of differences that exist when you compare one society to another? Just because we speak the same language doesn't mean we are identical to you CptStern. For me, those "a soldier's life" stories put a personal face on the war. So when a soldier dies, a common American knows what happened on a more personal level.

Anyways, there are more media sources in the US than you can shake a stick at. CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NPR, local news, commentary's, USA Todya, local newspapers, Time Magazine, Newsweek, Wall Street Journal, and tons of other sources.

If anything, United States citizens are over inudated with media sources and points of view.

just look it up, it's all over the news

now why would anyone want to invade canada? ...we're actually liked

No, my point was that a lot (and I mean a lot) of random ideas float through Congress. Few, if any ever make it anywhere. There is some 453 seats in the house alone, with another 100 seats in the senate. On top of that, you have the president which can veto stuff. Having 9 congressmen supporting an idea means nothing in US politics.

 

[CptStern]

Have you ever thought of differences that exist when you compare one society to another? Just because we speak the same language doesn't mean we are identical to you CptStern. For me, those "a soldier's life" stories put a personal face on the war. So when a soldier dies, a common American knows what happened on a more personal level.

seems kind of strange that you never see any coffins, dead or wounded

Anyways, there are more media sources in the US than you can shake a stick at. CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NPR, local news, commentary's, USA Todya, local newspapers, Time Magazine, Newsweek, Wall Street Journal, and tons of other sources.

If anything, United States citizens are over inudated with media sources and points of view.

yes I know, I get all of that up here too ...but I'd like to point out they're all corporate owned media ...media that has shareholders in mind when they report the news

No, my point was that a lot (and I mean a lot) of random ideas float through Congress. Few, if any ever make it anywhere. There is some 453 seats in the house alone, with another 100 seats in the senate. On top of that, you have the president which can veto stuff. Having 9 congressmen supporting an idea means nothing in US politics.

yes it does, it means 9 members think the election was compromised

 

[blahblahblah]

Pride? or blind patriotism? (as in I will stand by my country no matter what they do)why do you hate the UN ...I hate mondays, I hate celine dion but hating the UN makes no sense

Probably a mixture of the two. I would like to think I have more pride than blind patriotism. Both are useful and necessary for governments to survive, grow and mature.

As for the UN, I don't hate the UN. I hate very, very, very few things in life (hate is a strong term in my personal dictionary). I have more of a dislike for the UN than anything else. I just don't like how little it really does. It couldn't fix Iraq, and it couldn't stop the US destroying Iraq either. What can it really do? The UN does some good, but I think the UN should be more effective than it really is.

 

[CptStern]

Probably a mixture of the two. I would like to think I have more pride than blind patriotism. Both are useful and necessary for governments to survive, grow and mature.

you're treading on dangerous waters ...by your own admission your patriotism blinds you

As for the UN, I don't hate the UN. I hate very, very, very few things in life (hate is a strong term in my personal dictionary). I have more of a dislike for the UN than anything else. I just don't like how little it really does. It couldn't fix Iraq, and it couldn't stop the US destroying Iraq either. What can it really do? The UN does some good, but I think the UN should be more effective than it really is.

the UN is made up of dignitaries, officials and workers from all over the world, with their own agendas, ideas, politics...it's any wonder they get anything done. The Un doesnt have a centralized infrastructure and as a result cannot intervene in world affairs without the parcipitation of it's members

 

[DarkStar]

since when does the UN make less mistakes then the US government? *cough* bosnia *cough*.

I personally believe the UN air campaign in Bosnia (led by the US) was a major success. We stopped Milosivec from commiting further atrocities and continuing his campaign of genocide. The UN didn't even lose that many peace-keeping forces in the process.It was certainly a better military intervention than Iraq has been.

 

[blahblahblah]

seems kind of strange that you never see any coffins, dead or wounded

The last thing I want to see is a coffin, dead or wounded. I think it is disrespectful to the family of a deceased soldier showing his body or casket on national TV. Maybe other countries are different, it maybe a sign of respect in those countries. All I know, is when I saw the pictures of caskets with American flags over them, I felt shame that I was looking at such a picture. Seeing a casket didn't change my perspective or point of view. That was already established.

yes I know, I get all of that up here too ...but I'd like to point out they're all corporate owned media ...media that has shareholders in mind when they report the news

I think they do a fair job of reporting considering. It is very rare that we see a major news outlet submits to its shareholders. When it does happen, and the American public finds out, it rarely happens again.

yes it does, it means 9 members think the election was compromised

As a statistical average, that is 2% of the house that holds that belief. I am sure the Canadian parliament has such rogue people like that as well.

A possible explantion (note the word "possible") is that they wanted to make a face for themselves by getting mentioned on the news.

 

[DarkStar]

seems kind of strange that you never see any coffins, dead or wounded

Yeah, this has kind of bothered me too. During the Vietnam war, the human cost would be displayed in graphic detail every night on the evening news. There has been no such coverage in the Iraq war. I think this has less to do with the media not wanting to report it than the Pentagon's not allowing US television crews into insurgent controlled areas of the country.

Remeber that most of the US media in Iraq is embedded with military units. Thus, they are only shown what the army wants them to see.

CptStern: It's true that broadcast journalists have done quite a poor job covering the war. However, US print publications have done an excellent job IMO. Go pick up a copy of the New Yorker if you believe that every mainstream American news outlet is in Bush's pocket.

 

[DarkStar]

All I know, is when I saw the pictures of caskets with American flags over them, I felt shame that I was looking at such a picture.

Really? You felt shame? I had a completely different reaction.

Personally when I saw those pictures I felt a great swell of pride in my country. They evoked feelings of respect for the soldiers who serve this country so I have the right to disagree with what I feel is an unjust war. Those men gave their lives willingly in defense of the United States. You should not be ashamed of them.

 

[blahblahblah]

you're treading on dangerous waters ...by your own admission your patriotism blinds you

Anybody who has pride in one's country naturally has blind patriotism. They go hand in hand; you can not have one with out the other. It is a part of human nature. It is not a bad thing as long as you don't go over the edge.

Perhaps I should give an example of what I mean. I bold the word example because people (not directed at you CptStern) flame my examples as a belief or fact.

Pride - I love my country, but I am aware that my country is a work in progress. However, my pride can be broken easily.

25% blind patriotism, 75% pride - I love my country, but I know my country has faults, but I don't believe all of them are true. My pride cannot be broken as easily.

75% blind patriotism, 25% pride - I love my country, very few criticism about my country are true. My pride is difficult to break.

100% blind patriotism - I love my country, anybody who disagrees with me is out to get me. My pride is impossible to break.

If a person looses their pride, that means a person has no vested interested in their nation.

the UN is made up of dignitaries, officials and workers from all over the world, with their own agendas, ideas, politics...it's any wonder they get anything done. The Un doesnt have a centralized infrastructure and as a result cannot intervene in world affairs without the parcipitation of it's members

So can you agree that the UN gets results through inaction, right?

I'm not saying thats a bad thing, I just think it can be improved.

 

[blahblahblah]

Really? You felt shame? I had a completely different reaction.

Personally when I saw those pictures I felt a great swell of pride in my country. They evoked feelings of respect for the soldiers who serve this country so I have the right to disagree with what I feel is an unjust war. Those men gave their lives willingly in defense of the United States. You should not be ashamed of them.

I'm not ashamed of them, I am ashamed that somebody had the need to take a picture of that and cheapen the meaning of their death by publishing it in every newspaper, television broadcast and internet site.

 

[DarkStar]

I'm not ashamed of them, I am ashamed that somebody had the need to take a picture of that and cheapen the meaning of their death by publishing it in every newspaper, television broadcast and internet site.

See, for me that does not "cheapen the meaning of their death." By acknowledging it instead of ignoring it, coverage like that only further honors the ultimate sacrifice they made.

EDIT: If the families don't want those pictures published the pictures shouldn't be. Aside from that however, one of the founding principles of the United States is a free press. They should be able to report the entirety of the story.

 

[crabcakes66]

See, for me that does not "cheapen the meaning of their death." By acknowledging it instead of ignoring it, coverage like that only further honors the ultimate sacrifice they made.

EDIT: If the families don't want those pictures published the pictures shouldn't be. Aside from that however, one of the founding principles of the United States is a free press. They should be able to report the entirety of the story.

I agree 100%.

Ignorance never solved anything. When I look at those pictures I think of so many differant things. Why did we go to iraq? How did that soldier die? Who can I blame? The politcians or the insurgents? What about his family?

.....and the thousand of other thoughts that rampage through my head when i look at a video or picture.

I would feel ashamed NOT looking at the picture. The soldiers and "freedom fighters" deserve recognition and everything that comes with it. Good or bad.

 

[waedoe]

last time i check the un hasnt done ne thing for the world, why would we allow the incompenant fools run our elections. the UN is more corupt than any terrorist network.

 

[PunisherUSA]

See, for me that does not "cheapen the meaning of their death." By acknowledging it instead of ignoring it, coverage like that only further honors the ultimate sacrifice they made.

EDIT: If the families don't want those pictures published the pictures shouldn't be. Aside from that however, one of the founding principles of the United States is a free press. They should be able to report the entirety of the story.

I will have to interject by saying our freedoms are not boundless. Maybe I should exercise my freedom of speech and scream hateful insults at the mere sight of you(this is an example for sake of discussion, not real life ). Does my basic right override your feelings? That is what you suggest by saying that the press is free to post whatever images it feels, no matter the effect it has on others.


This entire arguement also has ties to the entire FCC situation. Someone here will (or has, didnt read everything) mention(ed) that you are not forced to watch what the news presents (in this case corpses of soldiers).

And one last item. It is unfortunate there is no reliably objective news source. Conservatives will cite several places/people as completely unbiased while attacking what liberals call "unbiased" otherwise, and vice versa. e.g. Fox News and BBC. It is a shame to be able to gather so little absolute truth from so many sources.

last time i check the un hasnt done ne thing for the world, why would we allow the incompenant fools run our elections. the UN is more corupt than any terrorist network.

I would tend to agree with you, but stating such with none other than personal opinions and no logical basis or evidence is rather crude. By the way, arent you supposed to be practicing an 'unbiased' outlook

Remember gents, keep this thread clean! Refrain from picking on people/ flaming.

 

[Direwolf]

You know what fixes beauracracy? More beauracracy.

 

[N0N1337H41]

Yea I am cocky...got a problem bitch?

Yes I do. I have a problem with the fact that people here in this country have a blind faith in our government. I love this country, but hate our current administration. Blind faith is for idiots. If you were to take a while and really study what's going on here instead of what our MAJOR MEDIA tells you, you would most likely have your point of view shifted for you. I signed up to serve and die for this country. I saw the beginning of this war from the inside. You might think that all the people in the armed forces support this war, but you would be wrong. As a matter of fact, Bush is not well liked by many of the people that have signed up to die so you can have the right to sit in your computer chair and pretend that you have a friggin clue. If you were to REALLY open your mind and watch some alternative media (i.e. BBC), you would see that our media is certainly edited. In fact most people are amazed when they realize how much of the picture we're NOT shown. I don't expect you to agree with me, but I really do hope that you investigate more into what you think you know about our country.

 

[Direwolf]

I really doubt anyone here is all that brainwashed by the big bad "media." I mean we're mostly internet-philes, and the internet knows no overall editing.

 

[Champ]

I just thought I'd post an excellent quote. It's not directed at anyone posting in here, but it'll probably come in handy if this discussion continues!

To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
- Theodore Roosevelt

 

[what!?]

I wouldn't trust the UN to run a Dairy Queen.

 

[thenerdguy]

Im against almost every thing about the un!
(That said)

Some things you guys havnt thought about, (Im saying IF) IF the un where to step in there are severial ellements in the usa that would think that the un is taking over and would fight. (Trust me there are people that hate the un more than me) (Not terrorist or anything like that but people that think it would be better if the usa where governed like it was 200 years ago) (Yeah and I kinda agree with most of the stuff they stand for, but not all)

Let me put it in another way.


Say that the usa is city 17 and the un is the combine. Does that help?




So if they wanted a second civil war on there hands they better not get involved.

(And if you guys think that im making this up i suggest you drop by my place and we'll go to a meeting or two) (No not clan meeting)

 

[thenerdguy]

Yes I do. I have a problem with the fact that people here in this country have a blind faith in our government. I love this country, but hate our current administration. Blind faith is for idiots. If you were to take a while and really study what's going on here instead of what our MAJOR MEDIA tells you, you would most likely have your point of view shifted for you. I signed up to serve and die for this country. I saw the beginning of this war from the inside. You might think that all the people in the armed forces support this war, but you would be wrong. As a matter of fact, Bush is not well liked by many of the people that have signed up to die so you can have the right to sit in your computer chair and pretend that you have a friggin clue. If you were to REALLY open your mind and watch some alternative media (i.e. BBC), you would see that our media is certainly edited. In fact most people are amazed when they realize how much of the picture we're NOT shown. I don't expect you to agree with me, but I really do hope that you investigate more into what you think you know about our country.

Yeah I dont like bush but i am glad have him instead of gore! (We would be out hugging trees)

But thats just my personal opinion.

 

[Dedalus]

as it happens, most people in the middle east tend to have more respect for the UN and their methods than they do for the US (the government system not citizens), so it might be a good move to bring the UN in if only to paint a pretty picture on it. might endear you more to the world.

having said that, it's a sad state of affairs when a country like the US would need to call in a third party to help with what should be it's own sovereign duty.



EDIT: freaky deaky...this post... 1,983 is also the year i was born...feels kinda like sitting in a bathtub with your socks on. or something.

 

[The Mullinator]

I'll just say this, I want a world government. However I don't want it to be the US, the EU, or the UN. I don't want it to be a humanitarian group or an enviromentalists group, nor a corporation. Eventually the human race will finally be brought under one banner, one government, however it won't be any current organization that will be able to do it nor be able to keep it intact. It can only be formed by drawing upon the best of all of these different organizations combined.

back on-topic:

If the UN were to begin questioning its largest contributers and supporters then it will simply cease to exist before long. Even if the US elections have been fixed (and IMO they have not) then having the UN watching over the US elections would mark the beggining of its downfall and open up a much greater conflict inside the US. And I don't think many intellecutals or people in the civilized world would want that to happen.

 

[^Ben]

The UN isnt questioning its some of the US congress itself.

 

[The Mullinator]

The UN isnt questioning its some of the US congress itself.

Yes but the whole purpose of getting the UN involved requires the UN to question the US's democratic process.

 

[waedoe]

I would tend to agree with you, but stating such with none other than personal opinions and no logical basis or evidence is rather crude. By the way, arent you supposed to be practicing an 'unbiased' outlook

Remember gents, keep this thread clean! Refrain from picking on people/ flaming.

evidence, the un scandal with oil for food, the countless genocides, screwed up food plans, need i go on the UN is more of a blight than osama himself, atleast we know osama is our enemy. The longer we allow the UN to exist the longer we allow genocide and corruption to go on. specifically france and russia are to blame for the oil for food scandel.

 

[waedoe]

I really doubt anyone here is all that brainwashed by the big bad "media." I mean we're mostly internet-philes, and the internet knows no overall editing.

besides the media is liberal bias ne ways lol.

 

[waedoe]

Yeah I dont like bush but i am glad have him instead of gore! (We would be out hugging trees)

But thats just my personal opinion.

no we would be debating who invented the internet :smoking:

 

[A True Canadian]

The Purpose of the UN:

"We the peoples of the United Nations determined..." And with those words the UN was established in 1945. The UN has several main purposes as an international organization. To maintain peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect; to cooperate in solving international problems; to be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations.

Just a few things to consider.

/me returns to the shadows

 

[adulus]

There's no "No, i think the UN are incompetent idiots" option

 

[el Chi]

last time i check the un hasnt done ne thing for the world, why would we allow the incompenant fools run our elections. the UN is more corupt than any terrorist network.

Well then you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

The UN, whilst having its flaws (and political body doesn't?) is vital to the ideas of international community and if you ignore the issues that can be brought to the attention of the world at such summits then you're hopelessly parochial and shouldn't be allowed to have opinions on matters that affect the world. Sorry.

 

[clarky003]

considering present events, I think the majority of the world should vote ,

in the light that its more of a world issue.

 

[el Chi]

In Australia and... erm... Ancient Greece... (I'm sure other countries too, but that's the only one that comes to mind right now) everyone is required by law to vote. Personally I think this isn't necessarily a bad thing. After all if someone wouldn't have voted in the first place they can always put "Abstain" on their voting slip.
However, what this could result in is people making votes merely for the sake of it without any political conviction which could be dangerous.
Could it cure voter apathy? At the moment the only thing that seems to do it is the possibility of an appalling person in power, for example Jean Marie LePen in the last French election getting down to the final two. People didn't like Chiraq but Le Pen was clearly worse (one phrase banded about at the time was: "Chiraq or LePen: With or without Vaseline.") I'm going to be interested to see how the next US and UK elections go. Even more interested about the result, natch.
What do you fine people think? Should the people be required by law to vote? How should people be dragged out of the current apparent rut of cynicism and fecklessness?

 

[CptStern]

well it's a mixed bag of possibilities when you force people to vote but considering just over 40% of americans voted in the last election it might not be such a bad idea to force people to vote.

but even with all the checks and balances corruption still happens. Witness Australia and Edward Whitlam. The cia intervened and toppled left leaning Whitlam by giving "an ultimatum to its Governor-General, John Kerr. Kerr, a longtime CIA collaborator, exercises his constitutional right to dissolve the Whitlam government."

 

[Dedalus]

well for starters they should change this "only over 18s are allowed to vote" thing. why do it on age? they should do it on IQ. if your IQ is below 110 then don't bother voting. and it'd work too. just get mensa to hold biannual IQ tests, and when election time comes around, those who met the requirements would get an invitation to visit the polling station.