The UN must be disbanded

[Sallow]

Such as? Such as the UN is way too dependent on the USA. Such as following the money once it's dispersed. The billions given should have improved the masses and not just the selected. Such as trying to redistribute our wealth on a global scale and for the love of God it was never intended to create the selected global warmning debacle. I think that would be for starters, Toro

Billions? The UN carries out the interest of the United States around the world, on the cheap. We get to have an international force of peace keepers move into areas vital to our national interests and for the most part, keep them from desending into total war..or worse anarchy. We have a component of the UN that does nuclear inspections. The UN allows for sanctions on countries that don't follow the US agenda. Add in it adds the the Prestige of the United States that the world has to come to New York City to have conferences.

If anything..the UN is a huge bargain.

This is single handidly the dumbest post I have written on this website. Kudos.

-SporK

Well being that it is in the stupidiest thread on this website..

Maybe that works.

Grats.

 

[DrSporK]

Billions? The UN carries out the interest of the United States around the world, on the cheap. We get to have an international force of peace keepers move into areas vital to our national interests and for the most part, keep them from desending into total war..or worse anarchy. We have a component of the UN that does nuclear inspections. The UN allows for sanctions on countries that don't follow the US agenda. Add in it adds the the Prestige of the United States that the world has to come to New York City to have conferences.

If anything..the UN is a huge bargain.

This is single handidly the dumbest post I have written on this website. Kudos.

-SporK

Well being that it is in the stupidiest thread on this website..

Maybe that works.

Grats.

The reason this thread is stupid is because you're participating in it.

Shouldn't you be off human shielding somewhere?

-SporK

 

[Sallow]

Yessiree Bob......like the way the UN, and it's leadership was in the Baghdad Psycho's pocket.

Like voting for the Islamofascist Terrorists EVERYTIME they were confronted with Israel.....our ONLY true Ally in the Mid East.

Like electing Ghaddafi the sponsor of the Lockerbie Terrorism airplane Disaster......UN's Chairman of Human Rights Affairs.

This position, Chairman of HUMAN RIGHTS, in the UN held by possibly the the GREATEST BUTCHER in African History Idi Amin !!!!

You, and the fucking UN should be congratulated for your perception.

Idi Amin is dead, pal.

Idi Amin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Callow Sallow,

I know that, pal.

And, of course, that absolves the UN from being the POS that it is.........

I know, I know......"it really is that simple'.

Seriously? Really?

Idi Amin was never any chairman of the any human rights council at the UN. Neither is Khadfy.

 

[Sallow]

This is single handidly the dumbest post I have written on this website. Kudos.

-SporK

Well being that it is in the stupidiest thread on this website..

Maybe that works.

Grats.

The reason this thread is stupid is because you're participating in it.

Shouldn't you be off human shielding somewhere?

-SporK

The reason this thread is stupid is it is a warmed over John Bircher Society idea. It's been roundly scoffed at as being lunacy.

 

[DrSporK]

Well being that it is in the stupidiest thread on this website..

Maybe that works.

Grats.

The reason this thread is stupid is because you're participating in it.

Shouldn't you be off human shielding somewhere?

-SporK

The reason this thread is stupid is it is a warmed over John Bircher Society idea. It's been roundly scoffed at as being lunacy.

What the fuck are you talking about? I don't know who or what the John Bircher Society are, but what the fuck do they have to do with this thread?

Christ,. You're a fucking moron.

-SporK

 

[Flopper]

I think it's obvious the UN is flawed but so are the member states. I personally think our investment in the UN is well spent. The UN operating budget is about 2 billion a year with the peace keeping budget varying from 1 to 5 billion. Our share varies from .7 bullion to 1.3 billion per year which is less that.0037% of our current budget, so cost is not a strong argument against US participation in the UN.
United Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From the posts I have read on this topic, I don't think anyone including myself is knowledgeable enough of the accomplishments and failures of the UN to intelligently debate the need for it's existence. However, I wonder what you think would be the result if the US withdrew from the UN. What would be the impact on US foreign policy? Would Russian and Chinese influence on the world as members of the Security Council increase? Finally, what would the effect be on US's ability to refinance our debt held abroad?

 

[DrSporK]

Our investment cannot be considered well spent because we do not get anything in return. Even if you're spending a dollar on something you don't actually need or want it does make a good return on investment. It's just a fee you're paying because everyone else is paying it. And you've been paying this fee for so long that now it would be considered unimaginable to stop paying it since the collective so used to recieving your money. The UN was noble idea but it is just not executable. Sunken cost. It's time to cut the cord.

And with that being said, if we cannot disband them...at least kick them out of NYC. Let them do their pointless meetings in Africa, since most of these "peace keeping operations" are executed there anyway. They are a burden on NYers.

Now to address your bringing up international relations, there is no reason to consider that our foriegn relations need change because we are not members of some world group. Relations change based on policies and agreements with the leaders of nations directly involved.

South Korea told Obama to fuck off. What's he going to do? Run to the UN and cry? Policies and strength influence international relations, not the UN.

-SporK

 

[gautama]

Idi Amin is dead, pal.

Idi Amin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Callow Sallow,

I know that, pal.

And, of course, that absolves the UN from being the POS that it is.........

I know, I know......"it really is that simple'.

Seriously? Really?

Idi Amin was never any chairman of the any human rights council at the UN. Neither is Khadfy.

The pal, Callow Sallow....

"Seriously" AND "Really"........pal,

Before you make idiotic statements......check out the facts.

This advice would've and probably will...... save you a lot of embarrassment in preventing you from being an ignorant fool.

Results from googling: Idi Amin, and GHADAFFI ( alternate spelling: Gaddafi)......not "Khadfy".... not "Krapfy, not Krampfy, etc.):

Idi Amin:
Feb 20, 2001 ... Idi Amin seizes power in a coup in January 1971. .... the same period, Uganda is appointed to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. ...
Idi Amin killer file - Cached - Similar .

Idi Amin was appointed as Chairman of UN's HUMAN RIGHTS in absentia.

This indicates how fucked up the fucked up UN is.

AND.....

BBC NEWS | Africa | Libya takes human rights role
Jan 20, 2003 ... Libya has been elected chairman of the United Nations Human Rights ... The BBC's world affairs correspondent Mark Doyle says the nomination of Libya ... Libya was nominated to run the UN Human Rights Commission by African nations. ... Seif Gaddafi, who spoke to the BBC when Libya was first nominated ...
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2672029.stm - Cached - Similar

Yep....."It really is that simple".....doncha know.

GOTTIT ?????

 

[elvis]

The Chicago cubs must sweep the next ten world series.

 

[BlindBoo]

Another Pseudo-conservative dream (pipe dream of course). Or maybe it's one of the rallying points for their dumb as dirt followers (like DrSpurt) to spout off about. When in fact they have no plan of actually pulling the US out.

Well since the UN failed to stop the worlds remaining super power from it plan to illegally invade and occupy of a country crippled by 20 years of war and 10 years devastating sanctions who could hardly muster a defense, it did not lived up to it's founding charter of stopping armed aggression. However, the good outweighs the bad. It, the General Assembly, really doesn't have any power anyway does it? I mean all the power rest in the hands of the Security counsel doesn't it? Of which we are a permanant member with veto power (Yes Israel sends you her thanks).

 

[loosecannon]

I will keep this brief. It is imperative that the vile, corrupt and utterly useless organization known as the United Nations be disbanded. They are a social and economic burden on many nations while offering absolutely nothing positive in return.

Their removal will not happen overnight but our very first step to combat this disaster is to remove them from the once great city of New York. Let them move their offices Zimbabwae, Palestine, Jamiaca, whatever fucking country will have them...but they must vacate New York. They are offer the city absolutely nothing other than traffic congestions in an already overcongested city.

I would assume that if every citizen of NYC was polled, the majority would love to see the UN disappear from Manhattan.

This should be on the top of every patriots list of demands.

-SporK

The problem with this idea is that it was the UN that was chiefly responsible for avoiding global nuclear war since 1950.

 

[DrSporK]

Another Pseudo-conservative dream (pipe dream of course). Or maybe it's one of the rallying points for their dumb as dirt followers (like DrSpurt) to spout off about. When in fact they have no plan of actually pulling the US out.

Well since the UN failed to stop the worlds remaining super power from it plan to illegally invade and occupy of a country crippled by 20 years of war and 10 years devastating sanctions who could hardly muster a defense, it did not lived up to it's founding charter of stopping armed aggression. However, the good outweighs the bad. It, the General Assembly, really doesn't have any power anyway does it? I mean all the power rest in the hands of the Security counsel doesn't it? Of which we are a permanant member with veto power (Yes Israel sends you her thanks).

Oh, I see. Changing around my forum nickname validates you and makes me look bad. Brilliant.

The plan is very simple: Step 1, demand they leave New York. Step 2. Proceed accordingly.

At least you acknowledge that they are a failure. But please explain what good they have done. So far no one has pointed out anything credible. Hell, i'll do you one better. I'll play devils advocate with you. Lets assume they have done something valuable. How does this atone for being utter fucking failures in their original mission?

-SporK

 

[DrSporK]

I will keep this brief. It is imperative that the vile, corrupt and utterly useless organization known as the United Nations be disbanded. They are a social and economic burden on many nations while offering absolutely nothing positive in return.

Their removal will not happen overnight but our very first step to combat this disaster is to remove them from the once great city of New York. Let them move their offices Zimbabwae, Palestine, Jamiaca, whatever fucking country will have them...but they must vacate New York. They are offer the city absolutely nothing other than traffic congestions in an already overcongested city.

I would assume that if every citizen of NYC was polled, the majority would love to see the UN disappear from Manhattan.

This should be on the top of every patriots list of demands.

-SporK

The problem with this idea is that it was the UN that was chiefly responsible for avoiding global nuclear war since 1950.

So, let me understand this, you're saying that since 1950, nuclear war has been avoided not on the strength, resolve and aptitude of world leaders who have the means to engage in such a war but on the advice from diplomats and beaurocrats from 3rd world countries?

What fucking fantasy world do you live in?

-SporK

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I'm not sure about completely disbanding but it certainly wouldn't bother me if they left NY. They have become a bit of a joke in recent years. The UN is by far the most corrupt bureaucracy on this Planet. The UN has also become a grand stage for brutal Dictators of the World. It has become a very welcoming venue for brutal Dictators to come and put on their grotesque public shows. That is certainly not what the UN's founding was all about. This current UN would be a wonderful World Stage for the likes of Adolf Hitler.

I think the UN should maybe consider a temporary disbanding. They should then revamp and get back to the original intent of the UN. Personally i wouldn't be too upset if they didn't come back though. They have also shown an extreme Anti-American bias in recent years as well. I'm no big UN fan but they do some things well. I just think we should consider less funding for them until they revamp. A complete disbanding is not necessary in my opinion but i have to admit i wouldn't miss them much if they did.

 

[Flopper]

Our investment cannot be considered well spent because we do not get anything in return. Even if you're spending a dollar on something you don't actually need or want it does make a good return on investment. It's just a fee you're paying because everyone else is paying it. And you've been paying this fee for so long that now it would be considered unimaginable to stop paying it since the collective so used to recieving your money. The UN was noble idea but it is just not executable. Sunken cost. It's time to cut the cord.

And with that being said, if we cannot disband them...at least kick them out of NYC. Let them do their pointless meetings in Africa, since most of these "peace keeping operations" are executed there anyway. They are a burden on NYers.

Now to address your bringing up international relations, there is no reason to consider that our foriegn relations need change because we are not members of some world group. Relations change based on policies and agreements with the leaders of nations directly involved.

South Korea told Obama to fuck off. What's he going to do? Run to the UN and cry? Policies and strength influence international relations, not the UN.

-SporK

My primary concern with the withdraw of the US from the UN is the signal it would send to the world that we are seeking isolationism. Secondly, both China and Russia as members of the Security Council would gain influence throughout the world. Energy starved China would surely seek to increase there influence in the rich oil countries in the Arab world which the US is so dependent.

Lastly with the amount of US debt held overseas, a reluctance of overseas investors to refinance US debt would send interest rate skyrocketing in this country which would be devastating to our economy. The only reason overseas investors buy US treasuries is they see the US as a safe haven. Going rogue and attempting to isolate ourselves would not be in our best interest and would discourage overseas investment which we depend on.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Any Foreign body that doesn't have America's best interests at heart should not be funded by America. The UN has proven in recent years to be very Anti-American and has also become a very welcoming venue for the World's worst brutal Dictators. We should at the very least drastically cut our funding for them. They don't have to disband though. We just don't need to be as involved with them anymore.

 

[DrSporK]

Our investment cannot be considered well spent because we do not get anything in return. Even if you're spending a dollar on something you don't actually need or want it does make a good return on investment. It's just a fee you're paying because everyone else is paying it. And you've been paying this fee for so long that now it would be considered unimaginable to stop paying it since the collective so used to recieving your money. The UN was noble idea but it is just not executable. Sunken cost. It's time to cut the cord.

And with that being said, if we cannot disband them...at least kick them out of NYC. Let them do their pointless meetings in Africa, since most of these "peace keeping operations" are executed there anyway. They are a burden on NYers.

Now to address your bringing up international relations, there is no reason to consider that our foriegn relations need change because we are not members of some world group. Relations change based on policies and agreements with the leaders of nations directly involved.

South Korea told Obama to fuck off. What's he going to do? Run to the UN and cry? Policies and strength influence international relations, not the UN.

-SporK

My primary concern with the withdraw of the US from the UN is the signal it would send to the world that we are seeking isolationism. Secondly, both China and Russia as members of the Security Council would gain influence throughout the world. Energy starved China would surely seek to increase there influence in the rich oil countries in the Arab world which the US is so dependent.

Lastly with the amount of US debt held overseas, a reluctance of overseas investors to refinance US debt would send interest rate skyrocketing in this country which would be devastating to our economy. The only reason overseas investors buy US treasuries is they see the US as a safe haven. Going rogue and attempting to isolate ourselves would not be in our best interest and would discourage overseas investment which we depend on.

Not necessarily. Where does it mandate that if we stop being members of a club that our policies towards our allies or enemies need change? It is not about how we appear in a subjective manner to various world opinions, it is what actions we undertake in relation to our policies.

China is reliant on us too. This would not change. They have interest in remaining in our good graces.

I do not see how any of this would be going 'rogue'. We have a DFA for a reason. We do not need to be part of a club. Removing ourselves from this club need not change our relations with any nation.

-SporK

 

[DrSporK]

Any Foreign body that doesn't have America's best interests at heart should not be funded by America. The UN has proven in recent years to be very Anti-American and has also become a very welcoming venue for the World's worst brutal Dictators. We should at the very least drastically cut our funding for them. They don't have to disband though. We just don't need to be as involved with them anymore.

Actually, it would be better if they disbanded rather than us simply leaving, but at this point I'll compromise.

-SporK

 

[Flopper]

I'm not sure about completely disbanding but it certainly wouldn't bother me if they left NY. They have become bit of a joke in recent years. The UN is by far the most corrupt bureaucracy on this Planet. The UN has also become a grand stage for brutal Dictators of the World. It has become a very welcoming venue for brutal Dictators to come and put on their grotesque public shows. That is certainly not what the UN's founding was all about. This current UN would be a wonderful World Stage for the likes of Adolf Hitler.

I think the UN should maybe consider a temporary disbanding. They should then revamp and get back to the original intent of the UN. Personally i wouldn't be too upset if they didn't come back though. They have also shown an extreme Anti-American bias in recent years as well. I'm no big UN fan but they do some things well. I just think we should consider less funding for them until they revamp. A complete disbanding is not necessary in my opinion but i have to admit i wouldn't miss them much if they did.

There are so many things the UN is involved in that rarely makes the headline, but is vital to this country and the world. Take the International Telecommunications Union. It provides the framework which our FCC works assigns telecommunication frequencies and satellite orbits. It is very important to this country that the US be represented in UN agencies such as this so we have a voice in how rules and procedures are drawn.

ITU is the leading United Nations agency for information and communication technology issues, and the global focal point for governments and the private sector in developing networks and services. For 145 years, ITU has coordinated the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promoted international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, worked to improve telecommunication infrastructure in the developing world, established the worldwide standards that foster seamless interconnection of a vast range of communications systems and addressed the global challenges of our times, such as mitigating climate change and strengthening cybersecurity.

About ITU

 

[DrSporK]

I'm not sure about completely disbanding but it certainly wouldn't bother me if they left NY. They have become bit of a joke in recent years. The UN is by far the most corrupt bureaucracy on this Planet. The UN has also become a grand stage for brutal Dictators of the World. It has become a very welcoming venue for brutal Dictators to come and put on their grotesque public shows. That is certainly not what the UN's founding was all about. This current UN would be a wonderful World Stage for the likes of Adolf Hitler.

I think the UN should maybe consider a temporary disbanding. They should then revamp and get back to the original intent of the UN. Personally i wouldn't be too upset if they didn't come back though. They have also shown an extreme Anti-American bias in recent years as well. I'm no big UN fan but they do some things well. I just think we should consider less funding for them until they revamp. A complete disbanding is not necessary in my opinion but i have to admit i wouldn't miss them much if they did.

There are so many things the UN is involved in that rarely makes the headline, but is vital to this country and the world. Take the International Telecommunications Union. It provides the framework which our FCC works assigns telecommunication frequencies and satellite orbits. It is very important to this country that the US be represented in UN agencies such as this so we have a voice in how rules and procedures are drawn.

ITU is the leading United Nations agency for information and communication technology issues, and the global focal point for governments and the private sector in developing networks and services. For 145 years, ITU has coordinated the shared global use of the radio spectrum, promoted international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, worked to improve telecommunication infrastructure in the developing world, established the worldwide standards that foster seamless interconnection of a vast range of communications systems and addressed the global challenges of our times, such as mitigating climate change and strengthening cybersecurity.

About ITU

Amusing.

I just skimmed both their website and their wikipedia entry. Essentially they fancy themselves the FCC of the world. They hold communication seminars, distribute foriegn aid, and promise technological advances.

Yes. We surely need to support the UN to keep them operational.

Actually, we don't. All of this can be done via the private sector. And it up to countries to regulate their own telecomunication policies.

Hell, you can have an ITU without a UN.

-SporK