Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You think first responder is the only part of humanitarian aid? And you had the nerve to tell me to go get educated?
Tsunamis, Darfur, East Timor, Rwanda, India, etc, etc.
They saved lives in all of those places. Merely because they did not completely stop the problem/massacre/deaths does not mean they did nothing to help relieve it. Their political power is very weak because of people like YOU. However as a humanitarian organization they do a LOT around the world. UNICEF, UNAIDS, UNHCR, UNDP...all these organizations do tremendous aid work around the world. But you don't see it because you are so obsessed with hating them you can't see past that.
Rwanda? Are you crazy? The UN Peacekeeping mission to Rwanda began in June 1993. In April 1994, the Hutu murdered 800,000 Tutsi. Good peacekeeping work!You think first responder is the only part of humanitarian aid? And you had the nerve to tell me to go get educated?
Tsunamis, Darfur, East Timor, Rwanda, India, etc, etc.
They saved lives in all of those places. Merely because they did not completely stop the problem/massacre/deaths does not mean they did nothing to help relieve it. Their political power is very weak because of people like YOU. However as a humanitarian organization they do a LOT around the world. UNICEF, UNAIDS, UNHCR, UNDP...all these organizations do tremendous aid work around the world. But you don't see it because you are so obsessed with hating them you can't see past that.
Rwanda? Are you crazy? The UN Peacekeeping mission to Rwanda began in June 1993. In April 1994, the Hutu murdered 800,000 Tutsi. Good peacekeeping work!
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0862135.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0107926.html
Seriously, your response to the 'hotspots' is pitiful. I know all the UN aid agencies, not diminishing their roles, though not excusing their myriad of scandals either, which you seem to want to ignore. In any case, when real disaster strikes, I'd place my life on US Marines than UNICEF.
Rwanda? Are you crazy? The UN Peacekeeping mission to Rwanda began in June 1993. In April 1994, the Hutu murdered 800,000 Tutsi. Good peacekeeping work!
already done.Come back when you have something of substance to post. Perhaps you only like the flashy, all at once type of disasters, but people who starve to death every day are still dead, even if you don't notice them.
no you didn't, as anyone who reads through can see. You already said the US military does better.I already addressed that the UN has problems. But those problems do not make irrelevant the reality that the UN is the best humanitarian organization in the world.
LOL! if it wasn't so sad. Meant well should take the place of doing well? That IS what you are arguing, you get that, right?Perhaps you have a bit of reading comprehension difficulty. She asked where the UN has HELPED problems, not where they SOLVED problems. I already responded with " They saved lives in all of those places. Merely because they did not completely stop the problem/massacre/deaths does not mean they did nothing to help relieve it."
Besides the fact that during the crisis UNAMIR had around 300 soldiers. Do you honestly expect that a force of 300 soldiers could stop a genocide of 800,000?
And since you are condemning the UN for not acting, do you believe that the UN (without the mandate of the SC, since the UNSC refused to act), should have the ability to invade a country and engage in war-like actions against the government of a sovreign nation?
already done.
no you didn't, as anyone who reads through can see. You already said the US military does better.
LOL! if it wasn't so sad. Meant well should take the place of doing well? That IS what you are arguing, you get that, right?
And since you are condemning the UN for not acting, do you believe that the UN (without the mandate of the SC, since the UNSC refused to act), should have the ability to invade a country and engage in war-like actions against the government of a sovreign nation?
Hello unable. Your ability to slam me, via untruths, has nothing to do with the real story. I'm unwilling to go where you wish to,now, after how many posts?Unfortunately not. This conversation would be much more fulfilling if you had. Instead I feel as if I am kicking a small child.
I said the US military has more resources than the UN and can do a better job at helping sudden, massive disasters. However they usually DON'T do a better job because they usually don't care at all. Potential does not matter at all, number of lives saved does. Learn to fucking read.
No, actually I was arguing doing well. Let me provide you with an example.
You go to Darfur. Help a starving child. Save their life, give them food, etc, etc. They grow up to be a good and strong upstanding citizen. Good job! You've done humanitarian work.
Have you saved Darfur? No. Have you stopped the massacre of thousands of people? No. Have you helped the massive number of refugees there? No. Have you done some good? Yes. Have you helped? Yes.
Now, do you get the very simple concept that you can help an area without completely fixing an area?
Hello unable. Your ability to slam me, via untruths, has nothing to do with the real story. I'm unwilling to go where you wish to,now, after how many posts?
The UN has 'mandate' of how many? US of how many? Now you wish to cry foul. Give us all a break. It's a failed body.
Mandate has nothing to do with it. Your continual posts in which you say nothing of substance are getting tiring. Either say something worthwhile of substance, or stop spewing your bullshit already. I'm more than willing to trash any actual arguments you make, but now you are just spewing rhetoric. God...get off the bottle, sit down and read some facts about the UN, and actually learn something so you can have some coherent view of reality that isn't so twisted by hatred, booze, and idiocy.
LOL! You have posted zip of substance, now you go for attacking the poster. Loser and lame one at that. Forgive me, I guess there isn't a think like a non-lame loser.
Considering you haven't posted anything I could attack, I chose to attack you. How am I supposed to attack the half incoherent ramblings which are half petty attacks on me, half vague condemnations against the UN? Peh...I'm sorry I even bothered with you.
Right. There are reasons so many choose not to respond to you. Let's see if you can't come up with proving a negative now, fitting in with what is best for you. You refuse to argue, refuse to research and refuse to respond. Then you wish to besmirch any that stand up to you, but refuse to go where you direct.
Sir, you are a loser and poseur of the first order.
Dude...you lost. You haven't responded to my questions or responses to your statements except with insults. Stop embarassing yourself. Its not fun anymore humiliating you. I am starting to feel vaguely guilty. Just retreat quietly with your tail between your legs.
I prefer self determination and it wasnt me who ever thought Suddam was worth backing but thats exactly what the US did for the monster for many years. Maybe if we just had stayed OUT of their politics from the beginning we might all be in a better situation. You do realize the US were a major factor in helping Suddam to gain power right? You do realize that when he was at his absolute worst, the US was supporting and even supplying him.
Sadly, we did help saddle the Iraqis with Suddam but they would be the ones who needed to remove him and to do so in their way and in their time. We just needed to stop propping him up and learn from our mistakes and stop supporting so many brutal dictators. It never turns out good.
How can you bomb a neighborhood with homes, schools and hospitals but expect that we didnt "target" them? How do you bomb a neighborhood and NOT bomb those facilities? How do you bomb cities, towns and villages and NOT destroy their water and power infrastructure?
The people in an occupied Iraq have no more voice in their lives and govt than they did under Suddam, the problem is that now their situation is even worse.
Congradulations to my country, we have proven that things COULD actually be worse than Suddam.
The millions of people who have been killed by governments over centuries were not actually wrongful deaths. Burning women and children alive with chemical weapons was appropriate and necessary to sustain the life of someone else somewhere, somehow. It could just as readily have been American women and children, or even the American President himself and his children believe it. This is actually why we have to fight them over there.
Often, killing lots of people somewhere else is a good idea and it will somehow make you free and prosperous. This killing is appropriate because its not actually you who has to pull the trigger, inject the lethal dose of poison or actually clean up the dead bodies, prepare them for burial or knock on the door of an unsuspecting mother and tell her what you did to her child. There are other toadies for that. Dont worry - you wont have to remind her that her tax dollars paid for the demise of her child at the hands of government. Division of labor and knowledge is purely accidental.
The link is a good read and unfortunately a pretty accurate reflection of far too many peoples thinking.
Better stop talking to me, Ruby.
The goons here will report you to Georgies Gritstapo!
I hear they serve some yummy lemon chicken, just what you need after a long day of torture.
