Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quehubo who wrote (80779)	3/9/2003 6:52:33 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

> Why do we want to give every two bit country an equal say? I wasn't going to get involved here but lately I have heard and read too many such arrogant statements from so many levels (including Orin Hatch) that I can't resist. For your information, we don't live in a vacuum. What happens in one part of the world directly affects everybody, including those two bit worthless people who just don't want to be involved in the mess that US and UK created in the first place. Fallowing your logic, the rest of the world should have absolutely no say in destruction of rain forests because they are not buying firewood from Brazil. But guess what, that would affect everyone on this planet. Does it not strike you as strange that UK sold Saddam the factory to produce chemical weapons and is now complaining that Iraq can produce chemicals? That Bush Sr. actively prevented the people of Iraq from over throwing Saddam but now his son wants to be the victim's rights group for the same people (but would not agree to an elected government in Iraq)? That a year after invasion of Afghanistan, despite all the promises of aid and reconstruction, not a single home has been built there and in fact the situation is so bad in Afghanistan that some people are wishing the Taliban would come back?! I normally don't go on a rant, but this is too much arrogance!

To: quehubo who wrote (80779)	3/9/2003 6:57:02 PM
From: kumar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

IMHO, u were being somewhat logical, until u typed this : Why do we want to give every two bit country an equal say? Why is your vote as important as mine? What is Mexico's contribution to the war on terror? What is Mexico's contribution to keep Saddam contained? If Saddam festers into a more formidable threat are your kids going to be fighting his armies?

To: quehubo who wrote (80779)	3/9/2003 7:19:49 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

The best time to plant an apple tree is twenty years ago. The second best time is today. - old saying, don't know from where ... yes i agree that multilateralism as currently constituted and practised UN-style is a sick joke, that's pretty clear to everyone, as are the heinous crimes of unilateralism of which Saddam among others stand clearly guilty So the question then becomes, Is the UN repairable? ... if repairable, we must set to improving it ... if not, we must replace it .... must, there is no other option besides the law of the jungle, and while the few men who control the eight thousands pounds gorilla may like very much the law of the jungle, there are roughly six billions of us who don't Once the emotion of the moment fades away, the populace under direct rule of the gorilla are going to find that handing absolute free rein to those who control it was not in their best interests after all .... and for more reasons than just worldwide reaction - for the loss of civil liberties and some very valuable constitutional principles 'Why do we want to give every two bit country an equal say? Why is your vote more important than mine?' Do you believe then that Gore won the 2000 US election, because more people voted for him than for Bush II? ... leaving aside the questions of dodgey ballots and whose daddy's judges etc, do you find unfair or unreasonable the principle of the electoral college under which low-population areas get somewhat better representation? ... what is the alternative then, how would you propose the votes be weighted - with the most people, with the most land area, with the most money, with the most weapons, or what? Personally i wonder whether the concept of veto in the security council might be outdated ... the whole structure of UNSC, would you set it up that way now? ... probably not eh ... but it's pretty bloody stupid to be pouring fine wines down the drain in futile petulance at some dim perception of what is frenchness, and be at the same time avoiding thought on these vital questions [not meaning you personally here, don't know your body of work] Kids we don't have yet, working on that now [fingers crossed at the moment, after three miscarriages] ... eighteen years after we succeed there will be strife in this world, guaranteed, there always is, and yes my kid[s] may very well be in the thick of it, as either mexicano or canadian forces .... i advocate removing the prohibicion in the constitucion against las fuerzas armadas passing the borders, for what it's worth, i also would like to see closer alliance between my two countries, also with Denmark and New Zealand and Ireland et al, as posted above ... a parliament of independent democracies, and yes with sharp fangs to smile with, the better to further the path of true working positive multilateralism