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 (112798)	8/26/2003 1:06:15 AM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<You mean he would rather place the security of the USA in the hands of Syria, Libya and et al at the UN?> In the UN, all real power is in the Security Council. In the Security Council, all real power resides with the 5 Permanent Members. 3 1/2 of those 5 (that's 70%) are liberal capitalist democracies (Russia is the half). Every NATO member is a liberal capitalist democracy. That's who our partners were, and will be again, when we return to sanity and become multilateralists. Do you have a problem with the US sharing decision-making and power with the other liberal capitalist democracies of the world?

To: quehubo who wrote (112798)	8/26/2003 4:52:45 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

<The UN is a complete farce a pitiful charade. Just ask Saddam he knows as well as all of our enemies. I am sure they are quite amused at the farce called the UN. > Que, the USA was the instigator of the UN and maybe had a hand in designing it. You say the USA created a farce? How disloyal. Actually, the UN is not a complete face of a pitiful charade. It's just not the best it can be. Most people in the world prefer to have the UN running the world than having the USA as Globocop. If you were in favour of democracy, that would make you think. You are obviously not in favour of democracy. Mqurice