whne the un did soemthing right

[Eg.]

can anyone post a link that showed a time when the U.N has done anything on its own that is equally as good as the rwanada and seiirai leone boondoggles are?

 

[Spartan]

Some peacekeeping ops, humanitarian aid... the UN is really so huge that it does a lot of stuff that no one notices. It needs to be dramatic, otherwise no one will pay attention.

Anyway, the UN is pretty lousy at real crises. Bosnia was an embarrasment, to say the least. NATO is often criticised for the bombings, but they were the only ones who did anything, even if they ****ed up.

 

[dys4iK]

The UN is lousy at anything that requires a lot of disparate groups to come together and agree about something that isn't in their national interest. It's like the worst committee on earth.

That said, I think it's a valuable resource in some subtle ways, as it lets many otherwise disconnected groups talk to teach other.

 

[CptStern]

some of you are hypocrites ..you'll jump all over the UN for mistakes and corruption yet you'll ignore your own country's outright lies and questionable moral ethics. If the charges against various UN officials (read: officials, not the UN) are true then they deserve to be held accountable, but so should the bush administration.

the UN has it's uses, without them who would hold nations responsible for misdeeds against it's populace? not that they do all that effective of a job but that's because some members have undue influence and undermine their good intentions. I'd rather the UN than the US police the world

btw Eg your spelling is absolutely horrible. I suggest you type up your response in Word and spellcheck before you post

 

[seinfeldrules]

And you are a hypocrite stern. If this was the US, you would attack without thought. Because it is the UN, you lay off. Dont accuse people of something before first looking in the mirror.

 

[CptStern]

no look at my response again, I said if they are guilty they should be held accountable ...but this has little to do with the UN and you know it. These are individual people doing individual crimes, they just happen to be associated with the UN. Btw is it just me or is it coincidental that bush is visiting member nations as we speak and the central issue just so happens to be the missle defense plan ..which many UN members oppose ...hmmm co-inky-dink?

 

[seinfeldrules]

These are individual people doing individual crimes, they just happen to be associated with the UN.

Oil For Food program.

Enough said.

and the central issue just so happens to be the missle defense plan

I believe that is a domestic issue, I dont see why international members would have a say to begin with.

 

[CptStern]

Oil For Food program.

Enough said.


I believe that is a domestic issue, I dont see why international members would have a say to begin with.

ummm why did they create the oil-for-food program? could it be because 30,000 children a month were dying of malnutrition because of the US' sanctions? Lets gloss over everything the US did in Iraq and focus on a few corrupt officials that skimmed off the top of the oil-for-food program. Ya that makes a whole whack of sense.

Look seinfeldrules your opinion is irrelevant, you never ever accept responsibility for what the US's role is in all this. That's not effective debating, that's just being stubborn headed. I'll readily admit the UN has fumbled the ball continuously since it's inception you on the other deny the US of any wrong doing and will continue to deny no matter how much evidence surfaces. At this point I'm convinced that if Bush himself came up to you and said "Iraq was just a ploy to make my rich oil friends richer ..daddy too!" you'd probably stick your fingers in your ear singing stars and stripes forever loud enough to drown out bush confession

 

[seinfeldrules]

Lets gloss over everything the US did in Iraq and focus on a few corrupt officials that skimmed off the top of the oil-for-food program. Ya that makes a whole whack of sense.

Koffi Annan's own son was in on it. Saddam profited over 10 billion dollars from the scam. It didnt help the people of Iraq all that much because of those reasons.

Look seinfeldrules your opinion is irrelevant, you never ever accept responsibility for what the US's role is in all this.

Oh, so now the UN's problems are caused by the US?! Somehow I saw that coming. Why blame anyone else when you can blame the US? Thats your motto stern.

you on the other deny the US of any wrong doing and will continue to deny no matter how much evidence surfaces.

Untrue. I've said before we were wrong for going in on the incorrect intel, but we ended up doing the world a favor by ridding it of Saddam. You on the other hand are again shifting the blame to the US. You do nothing but point out flaws while avoiding the good we do at all costs.

 

[CptStern]

Koffi Annan's own son was in on it. Saddam profited over 10 billion dollars from the scam. It didnt help the people of Iraq all that much because of those reasons.

so how is Koffi's son the UN? that's like saying I represent all of canada

Oh, so now the UN's problems are caused by the US?! Somehow I saw that coming. Why blame anyone else when you can blame the US? Thats your motto stern.

what are you thickheaded? the UN didnt invade Iraq, ohh maybe it was the Island of Madagascar that invaded? :upstare:

Untrue. I've said before we were wrong for going in on the incorrect intel, but we ended up doing the world a favor by ridding it of Saddam. You on the other hand are again shifting the blame to the US. You do nothing but point out flaws while avoiding the good we do at all costs.

were they trying to do the world a favour when they sold him WMD?

I blame the US because they ARE RESPONSIBLE!!!!

 

[Eg.]

wow 30,000 children a month, hmm lets do some math

lets say the sanctions went on for one year, and at 30000 dead kids a year, that would be ... 360,000
and since the sanctions lasted 10 years thats 3,600,000

but wiat,if saddam hadn't built all those palaces, or been bribing officials at the un, or by scaming the food program, maybe then all those children would alive if saddam hadnt killed them all. and the US provided most the food, as it does for North Korea

 

[seinfeldrules]

what are you thickheaded? the UN didnt invade Iraq, ohh maybe it was the Island of Madagascar that invaded?

Hahahahahahaa this thread isnt about Iraq.

were they trying to do the world a favour when they sold him WMD?

In a way, we were trying to rid the world of the terrorists from Iran. More specifically, protecting ourselves from another hostage situation. The UN is responsible for letting Saddam remain in power for so long, it is their job to prevent such things from happening. They failed.

so how is Koffi's son the UN? that's like saying I represent all of canada

Its just the most ironic example of the widespread fraud found in the oil for food program. How else did Saddam scam 10+ billion dollars from it and build all his palaces?

 

[CptStern]

In a way, we were trying to rid the world of the terrorists from Iran. More specifically, protecting ourselves from another hostage situation.

The UN is responsible for letting Saddam remain in power for so long, it is their job to prevent such things from happening. They failed.

the US would never allow the UN to bring charges against iraq


"Iran had submitted a draft resolution asking the U.N. to condemn Iraq's chemical weapons use. The U.S. delegate to the U.N. was instructed to lobby friendly delegations in order to obtain a general motion of "no decision" on the resolution. If this was not achievable, the U.S. delegate was to abstain on the issue. Iraq's ambassador met with the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Jeane Kirkpatrick, and asked for "restraint" in responding to the issue - as did the representatives of both France and Britain.

background info

"By the summer of 1983 Iran had been reporting Iraqi use of using chemical weapons for some time. The Geneva protocol requires that the international community respond to chemical warfare, but a diplomatically isolated Iran received only a muted response to its complaints [Note 1]. It intensified its accusations in October 1983, however, and in November asked for a United Nations Security Council investigation.

The U.S., which followed developments in the Iran-Iraq war with extraordinary intensity, had intelligence confirming Iran's accusations, and describing Iraq's "almost daily" use of chemical weapons, concurrent with its policy review and decision to support Iraq in the war [Document 24]. The intelligence indicated that Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces, and, according to a November 1983 memo, against "Kurdish insurgents" as well"

source

here's the actual document

 

[CptStern]

I want the 4 of you: Sienfeldrules, Eg, GiaOmerta and KoreBolteR

to answer me why did the US block all Iranian attempts at prosecuting Saddam for the use of WMD?

 

[CptStern]

* sound of crickets chirping *

 

[CptStern]

heh if I had known that would have shut the 4 of you up I would have posted it hours ago

 

[GiaOmerta]

I want the 4 of you: Sienfeldrules, Eg, GiaOmerta and KoreBolteR

to answer me why did the US block all Iranian attempts at prosecuting Saddam for the use of WMD?

Hahahahaha. *Silence*

Was originally not interested in this since thread since the UN is crap and I didnt want to waste the oxygen needed to fuel all the cells required to type about it... but anyways.

Alright, who are the Iranians to prosecute Iraq? Iran probably has their hands on some of the weapons which were smuggled out of Iraq before the invasion, not to mention they probably have a funcitional underground 'breeder' nuclear reactior pumping out plutonium. They're next. Dont worry.

 

[CptStern]

dear god at least effing read the damn evidence ..it clearly says the US was selling them to iraq

why did the US block Irans attempts at prosecuting Saddam for using WMD to kill 500,000 iranian soldiers and 10's of thousands of iranian/iraqi kurds?

 

[GiaOmerta]

Need more evidence than mere words.

Maybe a bill of sale or serial numbers on the warhead maybe.

 

[CptStern]

look at the documents, read the evidence

 

[seinfeldrules]

to answer me why did the US block all Iranian attempts at prosecuting Saddam for the use of WMD?

We got caught up in our preoccupation with Iran at the time. Really no excuse. The fact still remains, however, that the UN did nothing to remove Saddam from the time of 1991 onwards when he was still massacring his people. It the later 80s the US would have supported a war to stop the genocide as well.

* sound of crickets chirping *

Was it alright with you to play CSS for awhile? You still havent directly answered the other question.

 

[CptStern]

We got caught up in our preoccupation with Iran at the time. Really no excuse. The fact still remains, however, that the UN did nothing to remove Saddam from the time of 1991 onwards when he was still massacring his people. It the later 80s the US would have supported a war to stop the genocide as well.

I just proved to you that the US blocked any UN resolutions against saddam

Was it alright with you to play CSS for awhile? You still havent directly answered the other question.

you havent answered mine, you just diverted resonsibility ..remember you had direct evidence that saddam had slaughtered kurdish women and children yet you blocked attempts at saddam seeing justice...how freakin Ironic that 20 years later you play the "bring saddam to justice" card when you did everything in your power to stop saddam from being prosecuted when he was at his worst. Hypocrites, nothing but lying hypocrites

 

[seinfeldrules]

I just proved to you that the US blocked any UN resolutions against saddam

Blocked one attempt for that one situation.

you havent answered mine, you just diverted resonsibility ..remember you had direct evidence that saddam had slaughtered kurdish women and children yet you blocked attempts at saddam seeing justice

Tisk tisk. This is about the Iran Iraq war, not the Kurd situation.

In case you missed it: We got caught up in our preoccupation with Iran at the time. Really no excuse.

 

[CptStern]

that one situation???????? that was for the deaths of almost 600,000 people with WMD!! what could possibly be worse than that? You purposefully harboured a terrorist


no seifeldrules ..the Iranian resolution to bring saddam to justice included the kurds, you're thinking under daddy bushes reign ..this was at the same time as the iran/iraq war ...please stop talking about this if you cant get your facts straight, read the article

 

[seinfeldrules]

that one situation???????? that was for the deaths of almost 600,000 people with WMD!! what could possibly be worse than that? You purposefully harboured a terrorist


no seifeldrules ..the Iranian resolution to bring saddam to justice included the kurds, you're thinking under daddy bushes reign ..this was at the same time as the iran/iraq war ...please stop talking about this if you cant get your facts straight, read the article

Yes, the links you provided deal with a UN resolution investigating the situation. It provides Iranian evidence of the attacks. There was a large drive from Saddam in 1988 with documented evidence of gassing Kurds, I believe that is after the resolution we are talking about.

 

[Shad0hawK]

some of you are hypocrites ..you'll jump all over the UN for mistakes and corruption yet you'll ignore your own country's outright lies and questionable moral ethics. If the charges against various UN officials (read: officials, not the UN) are true then they deserve to be held accountable, but so should the bush administration.

the UN has it's uses, without them who would hold nations responsible for misdeeds against it's populace? not that they do all that effective of a job but that's because some members have undue influence and undermine their good intentions. I'd rather the UN than the US police the world

btw Eg your spelling is absolutely horrible. I suggest you type up your response in Word and spellcheck before you post

looks like stern is trying to change the subject to "BLAME AMERICA™" yet again.

besides how is the UN going to "police" anything without the US to do most of the work for them? oh! i know! by taking bribes and kickbacks from the ones that are supossedly are being "policed"

the UN is a farce.

 

[CptStern]

looks like stern is trying to change the subject to "BLAME AMERICA™" yet again.

besides how is the UN going to "police" anything without the US to do most of the work for them? oh! i know! by taking bribes and kickbacks from the ones that are supossedly are being "policed"

the UN is a farce.

care to take a stab at explaining this?

 

[Gray Fox]

Why would the UN go and bring down a government, it's not supposed to do that. It's and organisation where different government representatives can work out their problems without the need for armed conflict.
All you people that think the UN is bad organisation but like the US, well the US is the most powerfull member of the UN and especially of the security council which decides when the UN should take armed action, so ask the US government why they didn't do certain things ,and when it comes to voting the US often sided with country's of the so called axis of evil on votes.
The UN functions surprisingly well considering how different cultures, religions, economies it's members have, and how much of them there are.

some of you are hypocrites ..you'll jump all over the UN for mistakes and corruption yet you'll ignore your own country's outright lies and questionable moral ethics. If the charges against various UN officials (read: officials, not the UN) are true then they deserve to be held accountable, but so should the bush administration.

Completely true, you can say that Stern makes mostly post about the US, but atleast he doesn't ignore the UN's mistakes and faults, all you rightwing plainly ignore anything bad about US and instead of going in to discussion, you try to divert the attention and or make stupid accusations.

 

[Shad0hawK]

care to take a stab at explaining this?

sure. at the time iran was more of a concern than iraq was, basically it seemed to be "a lesser than 2 evils" choice(or appeared to be that time) they(meaning the US) were wrong.

so you basic point then is that saddam is not to blame for all the people he killed, america is. that is like saying it is not the robbers fault if he shoots someone, but the gun store he bought it from.

i generally blame people(and nations) directly for their actions, i know it is passe but oh well...

 

[CptStern]

sure. at the time iran was more of a concern than iraq was, basically it seemed to be "a lesser than 2 evils" choice(or appeared to be that time) they(meaning the US) were wrong.

so you basic point then is that saddam is not to blame for all the people he killed, america is. that is like saying it is not the robbers fault if he shoots someone, but the gun store he bought it from.

i generally blame people(and nations) directly for their actions, i know it is passe but oh well...

so in other words it was in your interest to sell wmd to iraq even though you knew he was slaughtering hundreds of thousands? Hypocrite ..wtf is this bullshit about the justification for the current war in Iraq??? Everything you accused saddam of doing you stood by and did nothing ..until that is it suited you ...hmmm I seriously never want any of you "patriots" go on and on about how evil saddam was ..when you did everything in your power to prevent him from seeing justice ...you're all a bunch of hypocritical fools with the deaths of 14,000 iraqis on your head ..you better hope there's no such thing as kharma ..or you're pretty f*cked. You deserve everything you get in iraq

 

[Gray Fox]

sure. at the time iran was more of a concern than iraq was, basically it seemed to be "a lesser than 2 evils" choice(or appeared to be that time) they(meaning the US) were wrong.

so you basic point then is that saddam is not to blame for all the people he killed, america is. that is like saying it is not the robbers fault if he shoots someone, but the gun store he bought it from.

i generally blame people(and nations) directly for their actions, i know it is passe but oh well...

I don't agree with you on the " that is like saying it is not the robbers fault if he shoots someone, but the gun store he bought it from.", it's more like saying that it's also the faulth of a gunstore owner who sold the guns to people who he knew would commit a crime with them :bounce:

 

[seinfeldrules]

Completely true, you can say that Stern makes mostly post about the US, but atleast he doesn't ignore the UN's mistakes and faults, all you rightwing plainly ignore anything bad about US and instead of going in to discussion, you try to divert the attention and or make stupid accusations.

Totally untrue. Read my response to his question for evidence.

 

[Revisedsoul]

how freakin Ironic that 20 years later you play the "bring saddam to justice" card when you did everything in your power to stop saddam from being prosecuted when he was at his worst. Hypocrites, nothing but lying hypocrites

im sorry stern but i highly dout that anyone here can be a hypricte in that sence seeing as most of them arn't even in their 20's. your grouping the few people your arguing as the intire usa

 

[MAx]

im sorry stern but i highly dout that anyone here can be a hypricte in that sence seeing as most of them arn't even in their 20's. your grouping the few people your arguing as the intire usa

1. WHAT? You cannot be a hypocrite before you're twenty? I beg to differ...
2. He means the gouvernment is hypocritic, not the entire population of the US.

 

[CptStern]

1. WHAT? You cannot be a hypocrite before you're twenty? I beg to differ...
2. He means the gouvernment is hypocritic, not the entire population of the US.

yes, thank you

 

[Gray Fox]

Totally untrue. Read my response to his question for evidence.

How about you reread every thread ever made in the politics forum.

 

[seinfeldrules]

How about you reread every thread ever made in the politics forum.

I believe I have participated in most of those threads. I should know my stance better than you...

 

[Revisedsoul]

1. WHAT? You cannot be a hypocrite before you're twenty? I beg to differ...
2. He means the gouvernment is hypocritic, not the entire population of the US.

yes he can be a hyproctite if he is younger than 20, but seinfled is younger than 20 there for he wouldnt be alive at the time that stern is stating. that was if he was refering to him, not the governmnet

 

[CptStern]

I was refering to the government and the pro-war members on this board ..well sorta


the government for using that whole "Saddam is evil he has WMD" schtick ..and the pro-war members cuz I just gave them the knowledge of what really happen and they still thought it was the right thing to do at the time.

 

[gh0st]

I was refering to the government and the pro-war members on this board ..well sorta


the government for using that whole "Saddam is evil he has WMD" schtick ..and the pro-war members cuz I just gave them the knowledge of what really happen and they still thought it was the right thing to do at the time.

it was and is