UN whisleblower fired

akiboy

Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2006
Messages
574
Reaction score
39
Points
16
Location
Mumbai
The thugs at the UN (including the Secretary General) forced this woman to cover up findings in the Oil-for-food Program. When she refused, she was harrassed and eventually fired.


http://search2.foxnews.com/search?i...&filter=0&sort=date:D:S:d1&q=UN+whistleblower



We need to stop every single penny of US dollars funding this ratship called the UN.....

Heck! The U.N is like a sinking ship commanded by one sailor (which is obviously the United States). The U.S should stop funding the U.N so much. Either the E.U coughs up some dough or else the U.S should boycott the U.N Then lets see how the U.N manages. But , as I have asked earlier why is it that the U.S only which has to pay the most. Why can't the European countries pay up also ? They are rich mind you. Countries like Sweden , Sacandinavia , Luxembourg , Belgium , Germany , Switzerland are plastered with money.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790



Heck! The U.N is like a sinking ship commanded by one sailor (which is obviously the United States). The U.S should stop funding the U.N so much. Either the E.U coughs up some dough or else the U.S should boycott the U.N Then lets see how the U.N manages. But , as I have asked earlier why is it that the U.S only which has to pay the most. Why can't the European countries pay up also ? They are rich mind you. Countries like Sweden , Sacandinavia , Luxembourg , Belgium , Germany , Switzerland are plastered with money.
Akiboy, it's NOT THE MONEY, it's the uselessness of the organization. Our problem might be best summed up the phrase, "The UNITED States of America". If each state was a country, we'd have 50 votes, like Europe, Africa, etc. Instead we have 1, granted we do have veto, but that's only a negating tool.
 

padisha emperor

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,564
Reaction score
53
Points
48
Location
Aix-en-Provence, France



Heck! The U.N is like a sinking ship commanded by one sailor (which is obviously the United States). The U.S should stop funding the U.N so much. Either the E.U coughs up some dough or else the U.S should boycott the U.N Then lets see how the U.N manages. But , as I have asked earlier why is it that the U.S only which has to pay the most. Why can't the European countries pay up also ? They are rich mind you. Countries like Sweden , Sacandinavia , Luxembourg , Belgium , Germany , Switzerland are plastered with money.

UN' failure is not the whole fault of UN. UN is an association of State, so the failures' origins come from the State.
the failure of a lot of peace keeping ops are the result of some State's policys, forst of all the 5 permanent members of the SC (example : the failure of the blue helmets in Macedonia, in 1999, is the fault of China, who put its veto against the prorogation of the mandate, because Macedonia had trade agreements with Taiwan, and China voted no to punish Macedonia.... Even the blue helmets show the States' interferences, it's an ersatz of the normal way of the Chapter VII of the Charta).

UN's aim is the peace and the cooperation between States. Not the satisfaction of ONE State.
Of course, the countries who pay the biggest part (USA, Russia, France, UK.......) can be tired of some failures, but if it is the price to pay to have a peaceful world....
It's quite idealist, but if nobody cares about it, it's sure that Un will fail more and more.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
UN' failure is not the whole fault of UN. UN is an association of State, so the failures' origins come from the State.
the failure of a lot of peace keeping ops are the result of some State's policys, forst of all the 5 permanent members of the SC (example : the failure of the blue helmets in Macedonia, in 1999, is the fault of China, who put its veto against the prorogation of the mandate, because Macedonia had trade agreements with Taiwan, and China voted no to punish Macedonia.... Even the blue helmets show the States' interferences, it's an ersatz of the normal way of the Chapter VII of the Charta).

UN's aim is the peace and the cooperation between States. Not the satisfaction of ONE State.
Of course, the countries who pay the biggest part (USA, Russia, France, UK.......) can be tired of some failures, but if it is the price to pay to have a peaceful world....
It's quite idealist, but if nobody cares about it, it's sure that Un will fail more and more.
All of the above may or may not be true, the US should still get out.
 

padisha emperor

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,564
Reaction score
53
Points
48
Location
Aix-en-Provence, France
All of the above may or may not be true, the US should still get out.
US should get out because UN fails. But if US go out, UN will certainly fail.

UN, with the financial point of view, is like a long-term loan, with high risk and few chance of success. But if it works, the investissment would be very very bankable. ;)
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
US should get out because UN fails. But if US go out, UN will certainly fail.

UN, with the financial point of view, is like a long-term loan, with high risk and few chance of success. But if it works, the investissment would be very very bankable. ;)
Then let those that have something at stake fund it. For US, the reasons to be in expired long ago.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top