SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hawkmoon who wrote (184736)4/8/2006 12:01:11 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
<I'll defend to the death his right to say it.> Whose death? There are altogether too many deaths.

I've gone on for decades [since 1984] that the USA was nuts to oppose Gorby and especially nuts to support the Islamic Jihadists against him in Afghanistan and later to support Islamic Jihad in the Chechnya.

Now, I'm thinking that Milosevic was doing a reasonable thing trying to stop the Islamic Jihadists in Yugoslavia. It was never clear to me during the wars [which I didn't pay a lot of attention to] just who were the bad guys, though in was pretty evident when the UN troops were tied to stakes, and the Serbs took over Srebenica that it was time to militarily tell the Serbs where they could go, and have the NUN take over to sort things out. Sure enough, the horror was not long unfolding.

I think the NUN needs a USA type constitution [but without so much federal interference power to dictate trivia within states] and failed states should be outright colonized. If the NUN had taken over Kuwait and Iraq, things would be off to a great start. Afghanistan could be thrown in too. Iraq could be divided up into self-governing protectorates within the supranational system. The oil would be owned by the NUN, not the local current warlord boss.

Other countries could volunteer to join at any time as member states. If the constitution was a good one, countries would be crowding to sign up. I think the USA would be the main beneficiary from having such a supranational entity and has the wherewithal to take a lead in creating it. But there's no reason why a bunch of mice couldn't get together and be the mice that roared. Perhaps New Zealand should start it up. We can afford to develop a decent constitution and put it up for joining. Helen Clark would love to be a world leader along such lines. Maybe she could do it. I doubt it though as she is too enamoured of the current UN system and angling to be the boss of that by the look of it. I suspect she has a good chance of getting the job. Helped the Cow/USA in Afghanistan, though not in Iraq [other than in reconstruction phase, which fizzled out]. Friend of China and Russia. Even France is probably reasonably disposed [why they have a continuing say in the UN ahead of India, Japan, Germany and Pakistan is only because of past glories]. Tony Blair is a good buddy and bound to support her. I'd go so far as to say it's a done deal.

First woman UN leader. <There has not yet been a Secretary-General from North America or Oceania.> en.wikipedia.org

Blokes have had their day in politics. It's a girly game now. Real men are marauding in cyberspace and making stuff in their sheds. The world is [more or less] tamed and turning into a house, where women rule.

Mqurice
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext