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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ish who wrote (134876)5/29/2004 4:41:22 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
They disagreed with us, just as the US has disagreed with, and thrown a spanner into, numerous UN objectives at the security council level. If the UN was just a rubber stamp for the US, what good would they be? They have supported the US numerous times, that they did not agree with Bush's very big adventure in Iraq, does them credit, at this point, considering what we know now- no matter why they reached the conclusion they reached, it turns out is wasn't a bad conclusion.

So why should we support an organization that doesn't always support us? Because there will never be a legitimate world body that always supports the US, and that is as it should be.



To: Ish who wrote (134876)5/29/2004 4:52:56 PM
From: jttmab  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
And in Iraq it's 130,000 US troops with 00000000 UN troops helping out. I can't see why we should support an organization that won't support us.

The US tabled the resolution and would not allow a vote. I recall Bush distinctly saying that you don't know the vote until the vote is taken.

jttmab


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News