ComradeBadger
Tank
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,723
- Reaction score
- 2
mmmm flamewar. I would close this, but I'll just give a warning. gh0st, no personal attacks on people.
Why do so many people hate the UN?
- Thread starter theotherguy
- Start date
PvtRyan
Party Escort Bot
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2003
- Messages
- 10,026
- Reaction score
- 1
gh0st said:
That's pretty much what capitalism runs on, being better and more rich than others.
And that's a good thing you say?
Communism isn't bad, the idea is good, it's the people that ruin it.
Worse than communism is the millions dead because of the US attempts to clean up the world from communism. Fighting fire with fire doesn't work.
ComradeBadger
Tank
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,723
- Reaction score
- 2
Sorry, but communism isn't a 'great' idea. It's based on a 19th century view of the world.
It works on a principle that labour is the main form of income, it's not. Imagination is.
It works on a principle that labour is the main form of income, it's not. Imagination is.
theGreenBunny
Tank
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2003
- Messages
- 1,376
- Reaction score
- 0
In reply to gh0st's little copy'n'paste action (some googling gets you a lot of extremely thrustworthy sites
)
I'll respond to it point by point made in the article, because quoting the whole thing will only make for a huge post.
1. Try actually reading the covenant. But as most of you are lazyP), I'll quote an interesting bit:
So that 'provided by law' thing isn't talking about freedom of speech or anything, it's talking about restricting freedom of movement when someone breaks the law, ie. locking criminals up.
2. Ohnoes! Commies! Talking about close minded. So if someone is socialist, he can't have good ideas? Oh please :rolleyes
3. *sigh* See above
4. Environmental issues can't be handled on a national level, the problems don't take borders into account. So I'd say it's a good thing someone is trying to do something about it.
The rest of this point talks about how birth control is ee-vul and children should always obey their parents. Don't even get me started on that.
5. Interesting. What the UN did in Somalia is trying to stop a civil war, you're saying (ie. the author is saying, but as you fully agree with him I'll just say 'you') that this was bad? And what the US did and is doing in Iraq is lauded as the best thing since the invention of sliced bread. Talking about hypocrisy.
That article is used for those kinds of situations where international intervention is necessary to save human lives. Granted, it didn't 'work' in the case of the issue-Iraq, but that's not what we're discussing.
6. If someone is going to try to keep the peace, he will need a way of enforcing it. I'd say the UN way is a lot better than just declaring war and attacking a country.
7. That's a nice bit of isolationalism you're displaying here. So tell me, if what the UN did there was such a bad thing, why is the US invading Iraq a good thing? More US soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq than in former Yugoslavia.
8. First you say the UN is playing global police, and now you're complaining when they don't do anything. By the way, there are also tons of cases in which the UN has 'ignored' atrocities commited by non-communist countries. I could dig up some examples, but as you didn't bother to write your own post, I'm not eager to do a lot of research.
9. This is overly anti-commie, but it does hold some merit. Taiwan should be allowed to (re)join the UN.
10. You know, this nearly sounds like it was written by a socialist. You're complaining because they make a lot of money? OMG! You commie! Anyway, corruption is always a problem, I agree with that.
11.
Wasteful and subversive? Proof please. And that last remark is interesting, as Mr Bush is actually using a very keynesian way of 'managing' the economy (spending a lot in times of recession, saving up when it's all good)
12. More empty claims. Because the UN bombed civilian targets they want to take over the world? Oh come on. The US has bombed a lot, they of all countries should know you don't always hit what you want. Of course civilian casualties are bad, and perhaps they shouldn't have bombed (I've never heard of this incident, so I don't know, hey it was about 40 years ago). But that doesn't make them a war organisation
Thank you for your time if you read at least part of it, I hope all this writing hasn't been for nothing and the thread's been closed in the meantime :x
) I'll respond to it point by point made in the article, because quoting the whole thing will only make for a huge post.
1. Try actually reading the covenant. But as most of you are lazy
P), I'll quote an interesting bit:So that 'provided by law' thing isn't talking about freedom of speech or anything, it's talking about restricting freedom of movement when someone breaks the law, ie. locking criminals up.
2. Ohnoes! Commies! Talking about close minded. So if someone is socialist, he can't have good ideas? Oh please :rolleyes
3. *sigh* See above
4. Environmental issues can't be handled on a national level, the problems don't take borders into account. So I'd say it's a good thing someone is trying to do something about it.
The rest of this point talks about how birth control is ee-vul and children should always obey their parents. Don't even get me started on that.
5. Interesting. What the UN did in Somalia is trying to stop a civil war, you're saying (ie. the author is saying, but as you fully agree with him I'll just say 'you') that this was bad? And what the US did and is doing in Iraq is lauded as the best thing since the invention of sliced bread. Talking about hypocrisy.
That article is used for those kinds of situations where international intervention is necessary to save human lives. Granted, it didn't 'work' in the case of the issue-Iraq, but that's not what we're discussing.
6. If someone is going to try to keep the peace, he will need a way of enforcing it. I'd say the UN way is a lot better than just declaring war and attacking a country.
7. That's a nice bit of isolationalism you're displaying here. So tell me, if what the UN did there was such a bad thing, why is the US invading Iraq a good thing? More US soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq than in former Yugoslavia.
8. First you say the UN is playing global police, and now you're complaining when they don't do anything. By the way, there are also tons of cases in which the UN has 'ignored' atrocities commited by non-communist countries. I could dig up some examples, but as you didn't bother to write your own post, I'm not eager to do a lot of research.
9. This is overly anti-commie, but it does hold some merit. Taiwan should be allowed to (re)join the UN.
10. You know, this nearly sounds like it was written by a socialist. You're complaining because they make a lot of money? OMG! You commie! Anyway, corruption is always a problem, I agree with that.
11.
Wasteful and subversive? Proof please. And that last remark is interesting, as Mr Bush is actually using a very keynesian way of 'managing' the economy (spending a lot in times of recession, saving up when it's all good)
12. More empty claims. Because the UN bombed civilian targets they want to take over the world? Oh come on. The US has bombed a lot, they of all countries should know you don't always hit what you want. Of course civilian casualties are bad, and perhaps they shouldn't have bombed (I've never heard of this incident, so I don't know, hey it was about 40 years ago). But that doesn't make them a war organisation
Thank you for your time if you read at least part of it, I hope all this writing hasn't been for nothing and the thread's been closed in the meantime :x
HybridM
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 328
- Reaction score
- 0
[sarcasm] Because America is always right and everyone else is always wrong silly. [/sarcasm]
I didn't like the US government before, and now I HATE them. The chemical weapon plants and all other 'evidence' presented were clearly PURE fabrication, with the only weapons found being weapons the US gave to Iraq before. OK so they found saddam eventually, but what has it all achieved?? many many of US soldiers and iraqi civilians have died, and there is no end in sight to the violence. The US expected them to roll over and present their buttocks for a firm Stars and Stripes planting. What a mess.
If you guys don't learn to vote properly (yes that means you FLORIDA!) next election bush might stick around even longer. Look out korea...
I didn't like the US government before, and now I HATE them. The chemical weapon plants and all other 'evidence' presented were clearly PURE fabrication, with the only weapons found being weapons the US gave to Iraq before. OK so they found saddam eventually, but what has it all achieved?? many many of US soldiers and iraqi civilians have died, and there is no end in sight to the violence. The US expected them to roll over and present their buttocks for a firm Stars and Stripes planting. What a mess.
If you guys don't learn to vote properly (yes that means you FLORIDA!) next election bush might stick around even longer. Look out korea...
Similar threads
