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: Maurice Winn who wrote (131456)	5/5/2004 2:21:52 AM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Respond to of 281500

Finally. Someone who isn't all talk and no action. Now we're getting somewhere. Or we will be. Soon.

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (131456)	5/5/2004 2:41:35 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 281500

The problem with the UN is that it is an anachronistic WWII victors' club rather than a political institution to which people are comfortable paying some allegiance. Excellent point! The USA is in a good position to lead such a development and it would serve USA interests to have such an institution. Actually, New Zealand could lead such a thing too, and if I wasn't so lazy, I'd get it underway. Maybe I'll do that tomorrow. It would be easy enough to do. Okay, I'll do it! I've just got to finish a nice cup of tea and go to celebrate a niece's graduation first. Forget the tea and that graduation! We ain't got time for it! Get to it!

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (131456)	5/5/2004 7:14:22 AM
From: Sig	Respond to of 281500

<<Hawk, I agree with all that, including the ineffectual nature of the UN. I meant more that the UN should be pushed along into a better form which would have more political legitimacy and a mandate to actually do things to control renegade countries or thugs. >>> You've got that right, the UN does have a chance to get things right and somehow be effective in establishing a direction toward world peace. Havent made much progress yet but its worth a try. Wtih Saddam it worked somewhat like a court of law, he being given probation for killing his neighbors,killing some of his own children and robbing family members. His probation officers reported back that he was still collecting guns and shooting at airplanes in violation of parole. For 12 years. When he should have been in jail. Where do you jail a countries leader? . Who is going to go in and arrest him and leave the country leaderless. To be effective, the UN would be setting world standards for leaders performance and moral values. Leaders would have to relinquish some power to the UN, and thats nothing they will voluntarily do. Some countries would be impovershed without child labor, some without the drug trade, and many are engaged in fighting revolutionaries who might or might not be the next leader of the country. Some countries are cutting down forests, contributing to the ozone depletion, ruining fishing grounds, adding mercury to rivers by dredging for gold, or creating hazardous waste. So we ask too much from the UN, from our President. The UN can be improved but peace will be elusive and new ideas will have to be developed as the world faces new challenges. The job is beyond one mans vision or accomplishment, an organization like the UN gives the best chance and is worthy of much thought. But in the meantime its a matter of putting out fires, addressing immediate needs , and concentrating on implementing a workable fix. In hindsight that will never be the best fix. The ME produces oil, the West produces foodstuffs. And it often occurs that if a ME country shuts off their oil production we should shut off their food supply. Both cases are impractical, because other producers like Venezuela or Saudi Arabia would take up the slack, or other Western Nations would provide the food. And sanctions have mighty little effect on the leaders, while hurting the poor. Good luck on the NUN Sig