PDA

View Full Version : US angles to be head of UN peace keeping



martinexsquaddie
11-03-2006, 04:24 AM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2435289,00.html
now personally this could be a good thing thing if the US decided to tone down the rhetoric and get behind the peacekeeping operations. sorting out where the cash is going. getting mandates that are passed into sane ROE and a clear chain of command.
But as the US has one of the smallest number of people on the ground as un forces less than a 100 and Bush has always been anti UN you can't really think this is going to be good for the UN or for peacekeepers

Ordie
11-03-2006, 04:49 AM
The US provides the bulk of the money to the UN. Even though the US has a minimal number of peace-keepers/observers, it does provide a substantial amount logistical support and back-up.

If the US does manage the UN peace-keepers, it may ask the new Secretary General to conduct a financial and operational audit.

giggler
11-03-2006, 04:09 PM
If US does which mission would it be, Dalfur?

Ordie
11-03-2006, 04:27 PM
If US does which mission would it be, Dalfur?

The problem for the Darfur mission is the lack of political will from the Security Council. Both Russia and in particular China are not willing to okay a mandate for Darfur. The US is trying not to tick-off China for its efforts in re-establishing the Six Party Talks.

In sum: Darfur is being sacrificed for the sake of North Korea.

annihilation
11-03-2006, 05:24 PM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2435289,00.html
now personally this could be a good thing thing if the US decided to tone down the rhetoric and get behind the peacekeeping operations. sorting out where the cash is going. getting mandates that are passed into sane ROE and a clear chain of command.
But as the US has one of the smallest number of people on the ground as un forces less than a 100 and Bush has always been anti UN you can't really think this is going to be good for the UN or for peacekeepers


Why the hell would we want to do this. I swear this is going to be a big mistake.

martinexsquaddie
11-04-2006, 06:36 AM
the pessismistic view is its away to an iraq extit stratergy

Satellite Weapon
11-06-2006, 06:16 AM
Why the hell would we want to do this. I swear this is going to be a big mistake. There are other problems looming like Lebanon, Somalia, East Timor, Syria, Sudan, plus Iran and the N.Koreans are banging the war drums.

annihilation
11-06-2006, 07:47 AM
There are other problems looming like Lebanon, Somalia, East Timor, Syria, Sudan, plus Iran and the N.Koreans are banging the war drums.


After the **** in Iraq, let the world deal with them on their own. I wont spill an ounce of american blood for those countries or people.

Clarsachier
11-06-2006, 11:01 AM
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2435289,00.html
now personally this could be a good thing thing if


With a complete change in U.S. international policy, it might be a good thing (marginally) but not in the mideast. The U.S. will always be a pariah in the Mid East.

Atlantic Friend
11-06-2006, 11:04 AM
If US does which mission would it be, Dalfur?

Cynical people would say the mission in mind be Iraq, so the final collapse of the Euphrates / Tigris nation can be blamed on UN mismanagement while the boys are brought back home before a certain electoral deadline... But even I think it's probably a little too cynical (as far as the election is concerned, at least).

Wodan
11-06-2006, 01:32 PM
The US provides the bulk of the money to the UN. Even though the US has a minimal number of peace-keepers/observers, it does provide a substantial amount logistical support and back-up.



USA pays 22 percent
Japan pays 19,5 Prozent

what do you expect, its called FAIRNESS

you spend depending on your GDP


typical american behaviour

seraosha
11-06-2006, 02:31 PM
USA pays 22 percent
Japan pays 19,5 Prozent

what do you expect, its called FAIRNESS

you spend depending on your GDP


typical american behaviour

Yea, wanting something back for all the money we WASTE on the UN.
How silly of us. And since I served on two UN Peacekeeping missions while in the US Army, this is an opinion formed on experience, what is your opinion based on Wodan?

Ordie
11-06-2006, 03:28 PM
USA pays 22 percent
Japan pays 19,5 Prozent

what do you expect, its called FAIRNESS

you spend depending on your GDP


typical american behaviour

If anything I'm an atypical American.

In college I participated in Model UN. Atteneded the UN Forum in Beijing. and a strong advocate for diplomacy.

The US is a major contributor. Since there is a shortage of logistical support for peacekeeping operations, the USAF fills in providing airlift and providing vehicles.

Keep in mind that the UN was founded in San Francisco in the USA. Rockefeller (An American) donated his prime East Side Manhattan real estate for its headquarters. Regardless the the rhetoric, the US has respected UN sovereignty and allowed access to all UN Members.

The problem with peacekeeping is the lack of coherent training, equipment, chain of command, communications and discipline. Some countries send its military for the sake of obtaining UN funds to line the pockets of the governments. Sometimes many of the peacekeepers are not well trained or have discipline problems. I knew US Army UN Peacekeepers in Haiti serving with the Nepalese. US Army observed Nepalese officers hazing and committing corporal punishment upon its enlisteds. If it wasn't for the US Army being there to intervene, I'd bet some of these guys would have in turn committed bad acts on the civilians.

Kaapeli
11-06-2006, 03:44 PM
Yea, wanting something back for all the money we WASTE on the UN.
How silly of us. And since I served on two UN Peacekeeping missions while in the US Army, this is an opinion formed on experience, what is your opinion based on Wodan?

Then you should know that peacekeeping is just a small part of what UN does. I'm guessing you didn't because you wouldn't seriously be saying it's a waste of money.

sp2c
11-06-2006, 03:59 PM
it's a ceremonial function in any case ... I mean, he (or she) won't be pulling the strings from cote d'ivoire to Lebanon and from there to Haiti.

no he'll be travelling the world begging for more troops and funding, it's important but not that important ... might as well be an American for providing the most funds, myself I feel he should come from the nation that providing the most troops rather then just make it another monetary thing

seraosha
11-06-2006, 04:48 PM
Then you should know that peacekeeping is just a small part of what UN does. I'm guessing you didn't because you wouldn't seriously be saying it's a waste of money.

May I ask about your experience with the UN?

Kaapeli
11-06-2006, 05:09 PM
May I ask about your experience with the UN?

My experience with the UN has been that it's doing a great job as an international forum and is the number one organization participating in and organazing humanitarian aid and other co-operation between nations for the betterment of humankind.
That always sounded like an advertising slogan... :)

If you have been a peacekeeper, I respect that totally. But it still don't make you an expert on the UN. My dad participated in the Cyprus peacekeeping mission and honestly he doesn't know a **** about the UN other than that considering particular operation. I mean he's even never heard of the WHO.

seraosha
11-06-2006, 05:29 PM
The small part of the machine that I witnessed was a waste of time, money, and an exercise in futility that accomplished nothing.

But like your dad, I can only comment on what I experienced directly.
But to be quite honest, the concept is flawed..."United Nations" that is.
Now "League of Nations"...that has a future, me thinks.:roll:

Dronetek
11-06-2006, 06:15 PM
If we went in to darfur, I think it would end up just like Somalia.

Kaapeli
11-06-2006, 06:27 PM
The small part of the machine that I witnessed was a waste of time, money, and an exercise in futility that accomplished nothing.

But like your dad, I can only comment on what I experienced directly.
But to be quite honest, the concept is flawed..."United Nations" that is.
Now "League of Nations"...that has a future, me thinks.:roll:

Unfortunately I have to say that you're being very shortsighted then. For every UN operation you don't agree with I could propably name half-a-dozen you do. And even if you disagreed with every UN peacekeeping mission there was then there would still be a huge number of other operations you've propably never even heard of but that are still just as important (like most humanitarian missions for example or anything concerning human rights and international disaster co-operation).

sp2c
11-06-2006, 06:27 PM
flawed comparison ... it would be more comparable to Kosovo imo except here there actually was a genocide before the intervention

Kaapeli
11-06-2006, 06:31 PM
I believe the Kosovo situation would be an even a bigger mess without the UN police and peacekeeping force present. They have made huge gains in providing law and order there and quelling the conflict.

martinexsquaddie
11-07-2006, 06:13 AM
often the boots on the ground get half the cash thats allocated peacekeeping can be a sweet deal for certain 3rd world ministry of defences.
unfortunatly that leaves the troops chonically short of food fuel and decent trucks let alone having sufficent numbers to do the job

James
11-07-2006, 06:37 AM
USA pays 22 percent
Japan pays 19,5 Prozent
what do you expect, its called FAIRNESS
you spend depending on your GDP
typical american behaviour

Sorry, we've been busy removing the yoke of tyranny from 50 million people for the past few years.

Ass.

Wodan
11-07-2006, 09:57 AM
Sorry, we've been busy removing the yoke of tyranny from 50 million people for the past few years.

Ass.

ah your pre-emitive strike also known as invasion


great...

Friendly Fire
11-07-2006, 10:05 AM
Sorry, we've been busy removing the yoke of tyranny from 50 million people for the past few years.

Ass.


Huuuuh that was a good one! May put it in my "cynically most quoteables"...

Sure dear you did liberate 50 million...wait a minute who are you fighting then??