Home Politics and Debate

If we dont act then UN will loose face?

SystemSystem Posts: 8,649 Staff Team
I've heard this argument from both Blair and Bush recently that if we dont act and act tough then every dictator the world over will just do whatever they fancy.
I'm preaty sure that the UN as it is isnt enough of a threat to deter any ruthless dictator (see North Korea) and I really doubt that they are all waiting there, hoping the UN will slip up so that they can act how they want.

But also the argument falls down somewhat, in that if your so keen on the UN doing its job why not let the inspectors have more time so that people can see the process working without pressure.
And both the UK and US have said that they will act without the Un if they want to, how does that preserve the UN?
It will just show the whole world that the US and UK talk big about the UN when its doing what they want but if its not they'll act without its consent.

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The UN lost face and credibility a long time ago when allowed tens of resolutions to be ignored by various countries.

    The only way it would restore its credibility is by seeking immediate implementation of all resolutions by chronological order.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think everyone realises the fundamentally deceitful nature of our leaders stance over the UN.

    As you have pointed out they only support it when it is doing what they want. They insist on following up the resolutions on Iraq whilst ignoring ones concerning Israel or other allies.

    They claim thy want to go through the UN route whilst also saying that if their is an 'unreasonble veto' they will ignore the UN utterly!

    It beggars belief how anyone can take them seriously.........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In America we have a game called hide and seek. That's where people hide and one person has to find them. That's not what we're playing with Iraq. Iraq is known to have certain weapons and chemicals from the 90's, they are to show the UN either the weapons or where they've destroyed them and the paperwork as to how they destroyed them. That was the agreement that allowed Saddam to stay in power after the Gulf War.

    It's very simple. And Saddam is not doing it. And some believe Saddam may be a year away from having a low grade nuclear bomb. This bomb couldn't level a city. Just a city block...like let's say where Big Ben and Parliment is. What reason, besides protecting German and French sales to Iraq, do we have to wait?

    In terms of the UN losing face, the members are two faced so they have another face to show if they loose this one.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    The UN lost face and credibility a long time ago when allowed tens of resolutions to be ignored by various countries.

    The only way it would restore its credibility is by seeking immediate implementation of all resolutions by chronological order.

    Everyone seems to ignore the fact that the UN has no sovereign power of its own. Those are "resolutions" not orders. Unless individual nations in the UN choose to take action as a result of those resolutions, they have absolutely NO power behind them.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Which would throw even more doubt about the legality and "right" Bush and Blair have to attack another sovereign nation then?

    And let's not forget Bush's minions queuing up to say that the credibility and significance of the UN is at stake if nations are allowed to flaunt UN resolutions unchallenged... To call these people the biggest hypocrites in the history of the Universe is the understatement of the century.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru

    the US going to war against a bunch of other countries isn't a valid thought. There's a ton of debate about this one. And people want him focused on the economy...even though it's up.
    See Aladdin, if you saw Iraq as a threat to people you care about and your country...it would just change everything. Theories...some I'm sure are true...about big business or power-hungry politicians become irrelevant. Even if they're true. Because the same question comes up: will a war against Iraq make the US or UK any safer and save American lives or British lives? If the answer is yes, none of this other stuff matters.

    Just a thought, if you look at the way Sharon has conducted security issues and you ask yourself only if it makes Israel more secure, then you see aggression is the answer. If we consider it from other angles including humanitarian...that's different. But when Isael is in the West Bank knocking down homes or terrorist factories...whatever...the attacks against Israel itself go down. I've seen it myself just in reading the news.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    Which would throw even more doubt about the legality and "right" Bush and Blair have to attack another sovereign nation then?

    You mean individual nations taking action based on those resolutions?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    12 years is enough time to disarm. Americans are more interested in protecting themselves than trying to please the UN!

    Saddam is the first step on the journey. It would have been better had the terrorists not woken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.

    Whether you are with us or against us we will protect ourselves.
    Beware! Americans are on the march!:mad:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We're scared shitless.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Obviously Murph is as confused about the difference between TWoT and Iraq as the spin drenched media wants him to be. This is far from the best and brightest America offers the world.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    You mean individual nations taking action based on those resolutions?

    Then is it not hypocritical to act on some resolutions but not on others.

    I see the point you are making but it doesn't excuse the double standards applied by our leaders........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat
    Everyone seems to ignore the fact that the UN has no sovereign power of its own. Those are "resolutions" not orders. Unless individual nations in the UN choose to take action as a result of those resolutions, they have absolutely NO power behind them.
    All the more reason then, surely, for the UN to tread very carefully when one or two nations suddenly develop an intense interest in taking action on the UN's behalf against another nation, after twenty odd years of doing/saying naff all.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Unfortunately it looks more evident that any forthcoming resolution- and probably 1441 as well- would not worth the paper it's written on. And how could it be with these tactics?

    scum of the universe

    Surely time to kick out the US permanently?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Proving the 'moral case'!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Toadborg


    Then is it not hypocritical to act on some resolutions but not on others.

    I see the point you are making but it doesn't excuse the double standards applied by our leaders........

    You don't understand the word "choose"? Other nations can choose to take action on the other resolutions if they so desire.

    Or could be like France and take action regardless of UN resolutions.

    Of course, the problem is that no other nation besides the United States actually has the military power to make that choice when it comes to Israel, huh? Well, gentlemen, you all made that choice. Live with it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    More like any country that dared to threaten Israel, let alone attack it to implement the same kind of resolutions as those on Iraq, would be dealt with in the harshest possible way by the Great Bully.

    Any comments on the disgusting dirty tricks tactics by the way?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    You don't understand the word "choose"? Other nations can choose to take action on the other resolutions if they so desire.

    Or could be like France and take action regardless of UN resolutions.

    Of course, the problem is that no other nation besides the United States actually has the military power to make that choice when it comes to Israel, huh? Well, gentlemen, you all made that choice. Live with it.

    Ok I see your point.

    It is then legitimate to critiscise our leaders for choosing to act in one country and not in another, when both are important to the stability and peace of the region and the world.

    The fact it is a choice makes it even worse........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Toadborg


    Ok I see your point.

    It is then legitimate to critiscise our leaders for choosing to act in one country and not in another, when both are important to the stability and peace of the region and the world.

    The fact it is a choice makes it even worse........

    Obviously, they don't agree with you.

    Would you prefer not to have choices? I believe there may be a residency available in North Korea...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Obviously, they don't agree with you.

    Precisely the time when scrutiny of their actions and a call for accountability and consistency is most crucial in society. This is precisely the situation in which governments are most likely to lie to their publics and seek to impose their authority over those they are sworn to serve. So be vigilant.

    Those who take up arms do so out of one sense of loyalty and those who take up political vigilance ensure that those who risk their lives still have a home worth putting their lives on the line for.
Sign In or Register to comment.