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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (205106)	10/4/2004 11:23:50 PM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573924

>The UN is corrupt There's no doubt that the UN is corrupt. However, we could certainly use their help now. We probably wouldn't get it, but we should use the UN to our advantage when we can. -Z

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (205106)	10/5/2004 1:14:15 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573924

The UN is corrupt: Who is on the human right commission? Libya is the chair. Cuba is on it. Haven't you ever belonged to an organization where you didn't like some of the people? Where you had differing views and were glad you weren't friends? The Oil for food scandal. The Iraqi people never received the food or medicine. Yes, there was corruption with the O for F program but there is corruption here in the US as well. HAL was accused of price gouging gas over in Iraq. That doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the wash. Credible evidence suggests that this was a major Al Qaeda funding source. You'll have to show me who the credible source is. Saddam was one of the major benefactors of the corruption. And he sunk his share of the loot into palaces and fast cars, and not al Qa'ida. Kofi did nothing to enforce how many resolutions against Iraq? Kofi Annon called the liberation of Iraq illegal. Kofi Annon did nothing to stop Saddam from killing and torturing his own people. My understanding was that Annan worked closely with the Security Council to get the weapon inspectors back into Iraq. Otherwise, Annan has no military power to back up the resolutions. He must rely on the cooperation of the member nation who is the subject of the resolution, or the military might of the Security Council members; otherwise, he must back down. That's why Israel violates UN Resolutions with impunity. Darfur. Bosnia Herzegovina Does Burma or China have the same moral authority of say France or Australia? In the UN they do. Does RI have the same moral authority as CA in Congress? Doesn't each state have two members in the US Senate so that the large states don't usurp the power of the small states? Wasn't that done for good reason by our FF? Isn't that why the Senate is considered the more powerful of the two houses in Congress? Having said that, the US, France AND China as members of the Sec. Council do, in fact, have more authority than Burma and say Canada. That's why the UN does not have real legitimacy in the world. It should be more like the US Senate. It isn't. The Security Council pretty much controls the UN and the US has a strong influence over the Sec. Council. The UN isn't much but it can be the basis for something more substantive in the future when the world is ready. From March 2004: According to polling by the Gallup Organization, 60 percent of Americans rate the U.N. as doing a "poor job in trying to solve the problems it has had to face." That doesn't mean the American public wants the UN disbanded. This post was done wiothout even breaking a sweat. No one said it wasn't easy trashing the UN.