Banned UN Speech: "Human Rights Nightmare

[Hollis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhWgZu6tcZU

[vulpine]

Regardless if you are pro-isreali or not he makes true, valid points that can not be ignored. The UN (militarily) is a joke.

[muck]

The UN bureaucracy is the joke. Indeed, the representative lay it on thick a bit, but he brings good arguments. The fact that the chairperson reprimands him for this speech is ridiculous, and is actually even more shocking than the contents of the speech.
Keyword bureaucracy in context with the UN: Thousands of politicians and officials that want to feel well for a few years because of the lack of electoral pressure, just earning a lot of money and smashing down every greenhorn that dares to disagree. The UN is always run down, but in reality only the politicians are the problem. Politicians produce only garbage at home, why should they make it better if they join the UN.

[ArmedPacifist]

Regardless if you are pro-isreali or not he makes true, valid points that can not be ignored. The UN (militarily) is a joke.

If it's a joke it's certainly not a very funny one.

As much as I agree with a lot of what he has to say, he seems to just use Darfur as a way to argue the treatment of Israel, hardly an act of goodwill.

[bryanleu2002]

Our City has a UN chapter to boot, its sweetness...


http://www.unaseattle.org/images/title2.gif

The reason UNA exists is because we believe in the United Nations--understanding why it was formed and why it is so important to the all the countries of the world today. The UN (http://www.un.org/) is much more than the Security Council. There are a myriad of agencies and departments and affiliated groups that deal with disasters, refugees, hunger, poverty, agriculture, health. You no doubt have heard about UNICEF, World Health Organization, World Court. Where would the world be without the United Nations?

http://www.unaseattle.org/

[vulpine]

If it's a joke it's certainly not a very funny one.

As much as I agree with a lot of what he has to say, he seems to just use Darfur as a way to argue the treatment of Israel, hardly an act of goodwill.


Speaking of Darfur, the UN are not the only one's to be blamed. All nations have taken a blind eye to that and we should all be blamed for not doing anything to stop the genocide.

[muck]

Speaking of Darfur, the UN are not the only one's to be blamed. All nations have taken a blind eye to that and we should all be blamed for not doing anything to stop the genocide.

For sure, there is nothing to win except of receivers for donations. No oil, no gas, not even gold or silver or at least coal...:|

[vulpine]

For sure, there is nothing to win except of receivers for donations. No oil, no gas, not even gold or silver or at least coal...:|


Sad isn't it!!!!!!!!!!!:-(

[SBL]

While this is hardly an unbiased clip, I think it provides a good contrast between what is accepted and what is not accepted in the UN. Just look at the Chavez speech a few months back.

Contains the speech featured above:
http://www.youtube.com/v/BMEw0lZ3k_Y

[vulpine]

While this is hardly an unbiased clip, I think it provides a good contrast between what is accepted and what is not accepted in the UN. Just look at the Chavez speech a few months back.

Contains the speech featured above:
http://www.youtube.com/v/BMEw0lZ3k_Y


OHHH!!!! Snap!! That punk ass Chavez can call Bush the Devil but this guy can't point out facts.woot

[Atlantic Friend]

Regardless if you are pro-isreali or not he makes true, valid points that can not be ignored. The UN (militarily) is a joke.

The UN can only be as powerful as the nation-states which compose it want it to be. If they wanted a strongly armed UN, able of acting militraily against one of their own, they could have that.

[muck]

That is also true. To remove the ceto right of the Security Council permanent members would allow the UN to react with determination and above all, quickly.

[afreu]

The thing that bothers me with all the UN bashing going on this forum is that people seem to ignore that the United Nations is simply a copy of international political conditions. It's the powerful nations, more precisely the ones that won World War II who are determining what is and what isn't UN policy.

Removing the veto right for the security council members would be an idea but than again the UN wouldn't be able to enforce resolutions against such powerfull nations as the USA.

So yes the UN itself is in some aspects a joke but even more is the commitment of the states to overcome their national agendas totally insufficient.

And with all its numerous mistakes and failures in the past the UN is nevertheless responsible for a few good things too, that single nations wouldn't have been able to accomplish on their own.

[muck]

The thing that bothers me with all the UN bashing going on this forum is that people seem to ignore that the United Nations is simply a copy of international political conditions. It's the powerful nations, more precisely the ones that won World War II who are determining what is and what isn't UN policy.

Removing the veto right for the security council members would be an idea but than again the UN wouldn't be able to enforce resolutions against such powerfull nations as the USA.

So yes the UN itself is in some aspects a joke but even more is the commitment of the states to overcome their national agendas totally insufficient.

And with all its numerous mistakes and failures in the past the UN is nevertheless responsible for a few good things too, that single nations wouldn't have been able to accomplish on their own.

Maybe I did not get this, but if the Veto rights were removed, I'd say there were finally chances to enforce sanctions and resolutions against the US. In 2003, the try of Iraq to declare the US as the aggressor in the council failed because the US voted against it!

But in general I second your opinion. The actual structure of the organisation is not the best solution, but I hardly wanted an earth without the UN.

[Dakota435]

The thing that bothers me with all the UN bashing going on this forum is that people seem to ignore that the United Nations is simply a copy of international political conditions. It's the powerful nations, more precisely the ones that won World War II who are determining what is and what isn't UN policy.

Removing the veto right for the security council members would be an idea but than again the UN wouldn't be able to enforce resolutions against such powerfull nations as the USA.

So yes the UN itself is in some aspects a joke but even more is the commitment of the states to overcome their national agendas totally insufficient.

And with all its numerous mistakes and failures in the past the UN is nevertheless responsible for a few good things too, that single nations wouldn't have been able to accomplish on their own.

As the tsunami victims found out, the most effective and efficient emergency foreign aid organization is the United States Navy. The UN is an utterly useless and corrupt organization.

[muck]

As the tsunami victims found out, the most effective and efficient emergency foreign aid organization is the United States Navy.

:roll: Doubtless they were the only ones who worked their butts off there...

[Kaapeli]

As the tsunami victims found out, the most effective and efficient emergency foreign aid organization is the United States Navy. The UN is an utterly useless and corrupt organization.

So we can expect the US Navy to take over the UN humanitarian operations among them feeding over 100 million people in 80 countries every year? And of course the tasks of UN organizations like the WHO, UNICEF, UNESCO, World Bank etc. plus offer a forum for international co-operation and development?
I didn't know the US Navy had all this in it but if You say so...

[Calanen]

What an excellent speech. All for nothing though in a sense, everyone there is in on the joke.

[AROUETLJ]

I don't know why you chaps hate the UN so much. If it wasn't for them, you'd all have died of polio or smallpox.