user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Ignorance and knee jerk reaction
Many believe it is taboo to criticize the UN because they believe it is a good forum to resolve differences between countries. In some ways, this may be true. However, a significant and large number of the countries that are members of the UN are ruled by dictators, corrupt politicians, religious extremists and the like. There should certainly be criticism especially when these countries (China, Saudi Arabia, etc) are placed on the Human Rights Committee. I don't think the entire idea of the UN or the UN should be totally tossed out but it is filled with corruption (by administrators) and representatives of very oppressive countries.
In addition, I'll add that organizations such as the UN should be harshly criticized for doing essentially nothing about Darfur. In a positive respect, the IAEA which operates under the auspices of the UN has vigorously pointed out Iran's non-compliance with Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty and likely move towards nuclear weapons. Yes, folks... you can read the actual report stating these things. Its at the UN website.
Those are some good points, Tin
so why don't we just dissolve UN and get it over with?
oh wait, by the same logic, we should dissolve USA too, thanks to Bush/Cheney gang huh?
by LCD on Mon Jun 11, 07 1:21am
[+]
Voted : Let's not throw away the good with the bad
The U. N. has many problems, but it does some things right.
Voted : Let's not throw away the good with the bad
The world needs a global forum where different points of view can over the most various issues can be discussed. But no one denies that the UN need an overhaul and to simply terminate it would be a mistake, methinks.
Moreover, I dont see you UN-bashers coming up with a valid alternative. All i've heard so far is an impressionistic concept of a "league of democracies", which would be something like the coalition in Iraq...but that doesnt seem to work so well, now does it?
I've been told that I'm one of those evil libigot bastiches, and I don't defend the UN in any way. I want it totally revamped, from the ground up.
Voted : Let's not throw away the good with the bad
total failure? i don't think it's a total failure. i think it needs reform, but i'm glad we have it for the most part.
Voted : Let's not throw away the good with the bad
The U.N. isn't a total failure, although it is profoundly flawed.
Ironic, though, that supporters of the most failed American presidency in history are so eager to condemn others.
The essential dumbness of this ballot is dramatically illustrated by the author's claim the the U.N. is to blame for Bush's disastrous Iraq debacle.
Well since there is no such thing as a libigot, it makes it a bit hard to answer this question. Hey lets take to other antonyms and combine them just for maximum sensationalism. Jew-Nazi? No one absolutely loves what the UN is currently, but it doesn't change the fact that there needs to be a forum for world leaders to discuss big issues, like world hunger or AIDS relief.
No one seems too terribly happy with the current state America is in but no one is discussing dismantling it (at least no one with an once of credibility). Maybe you should examine that analogy deeply since you are a citizen of the world first and an American second.
Voted : Let's not throw away the good with the bad
The U.N. is often ineffectual and just silly. On the other hand, they provide a forum for all countries to dialogue, even ones not officially recognizing others. As such, it is a good organization for the world, however frustrating we often find it.
TNG:
Let's edit the ballot description, and see if you get my meaning:
"The US has been a complete disaster for quite some time now, creating the current situation in Iraq by virtue of unilaterally invading, allowing U.S. oil companies to purchase illegal oil from Iraq, oil for food scandal, US troops raping and killing innocent civilians in Baghdad, shady dealings with the World Bank (Wolfowitz), the list goes on and on.
Why is it that conservistupes want to continually defend the U.S. then?"
So, what do you think of it now?
I would have thought that the US and UK keeping Saddam in power for twenty years before he suddenly became a 'bad' dictator and we had to get rid of him created the situation in Iraq, but maybe thats just me...
Cranky didn't actually edit the ballot, he merely, to demonstrate his point, inserted other words in the ballot description to show what he was talking about. It makes perfect sense. Some people would argue that the United States is the biggest critic of the United Nations and it is often Americans that call for it to be changed or even dismantled. Why? Very often when we do that, it prompts others to ask why it's wrong to apply the same logic to the United States. In other words, if we're prepared to critisize the United Nations for its faults, shouldn't we too be prepared for criticism ourselves? Anyway, I don't thin the United Nations is a failure..I just think it is not being run the way it was intended to.
TNG:
I did comment on the ballot. I said it was extremely dumb. As an example, I pointed out the phrase where the U.N. gets blamed for Bush's idiotic, corrupt, egomaniacal decision to invade Iraq. The U.N. was in no way responsible for Bush's war in Iraq, and actually spoke out against it.
Then you asked me to explain why the ballot was so dumb, so as an illustration, I replaced the U.N. with the U.S., so you could see how crude the basic reasoning is using something other than the U.N.
Voted : Let's not throw away the good with the bad
Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water...there are many behind the scene maneuverings which will always keep all those Countries from reaching a concensus on many critical issues, a good example of that is the news yesterday that the Sudan is helping the CIA on the war against terror therefore the U.S. looks the other way when it comes to certain issues on human rights...it's always better to convene and talk than to try to play it like a game of "chess"...
I do not consider myself to be a libigot but to suggest they all defend the U.N. must mean the the conservbigots would bomb the "place"...that seems to be their first knee jerk reaction to everything lately (without considering ramifications).
|
|
