Pages

Jump to bottom

18 comments

1 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Sat, Nov 20, 2010 6:55:49pm

There is the UN for you.

The only place in the Middle East where gay Muslims are routinely given asylum: Israel.

2 Gus  Sat, Nov 20, 2010 6:56:29pm

What a joke. Some cultures are just hopeless.

3 Bob Levin  Sat, Nov 20, 2010 9:53:18pm

re: #2 Gus 802

You're talking about the UN, right?

4 laZardo  Sat, Nov 20, 2010 10:49:30pm

re: #1 LudwigVanQuixote

There is the UN for you.

The only place in the Middle East where gay Muslims are routinely given asylum: Israel.

"That's only because Mossad threatens to out them if they don't cooperate!"

/

5 Romantic Heretic  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:38:24pm

We could go back to the days before the League of Nations was formed. You know, when it was every nation for itself, there was no international law and security was dependent on intricate webs of treaties.

That security would fall apart when, say, an Archduke was shot in Sarajevo triggering a series of events that ended with millions of people dying.

The UN does suck sometimes. But it beats the living hell out of the alternative.

This organization is created to prevent you from going to hell. It isn't created to take you to heaven. - Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr.

6 Buck  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:47:23pm

The UN Alternative:

Only countries that have true democracy get any vote.

Freedom, Multi-party, secret ballot, regularly scheduled democracy.

Otherwise, as we have learned, the ambassador does not represent the people, but only represents the dictator and tyrant.

7 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 3:50:00pm

re: #6 Buck

Read #5 until you understand it.

8 Bob Levin  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 4:42:17pm

re: #5 Romantic Heretic

So your only option to the UN is to go back in time to 1913? I would hope for a global body that isn't thoroughly corrupt as an option. If that is too pie in the sky, then no lives are going to be saved, because that's not what the UN does.

The UN has an appalling record when it comes to stopping genocide, simple war, or crimes against humanity. They didn't stop Stalinist Russia during the slaughter of 20,000,000 people. They didn't stop Maoist China from killing 50,000,000 people. When Nasser wanted to wipe out Israel, the UN politely left the region for the time allotted to get the job done. I don't recall Pol Pot living in fear of the UN. Iran toys with the UN, Kim Jung Ill does whatever he does to laugh at the UN.

The UN turns a blind eye to the Sudan, Somalia, and Serbia and lets people like Charles Taylor do his thing for entirely too long. It allowed itself to be enthusiastically corrupted by Saddam Hussein. It regularly appoints the most egregious violators of human rights to the very commissions whose mission is to stop the very behavior its sitting members exhibit as a matter of pride.

I'm just scraping the surface of the mass murder it has failed to stop, the hypocrisy it exhibits on a daily basis. It's peace keeping missions are ludicrous.

And the only argument you can mount in favor of this augustly corrupt body is--it's better than nothing?

Nothing might be better. I'm willing to give nothing a chance. At least it would be easier to park in New York.

9 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 4:47:18pm

re: #8 Bob Levin

The UN has an appalling record when it comes to stopping genocide, simple war, or crimes against humanity. They didn't stop Stalinist Russia during the slaughter of 20,000,000 people.

Well, it could hardly have stopped something that mostly happened before it even appeared.

10 Romantic Heretic  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 5:38:22pm

re: #8 Bob Levin

So your only option to the UN is to go back in time to 1913? I would hope for a global body that isn't thoroughly corrupt as an option. If that is too pie in the sky, then no lives are going to be saved, because that's not what the UN does.

The UN has an appalling record when it comes to stopping genocide, simple war, or crimes against humanity. They didn't stop Stalinist Russia during the slaughter of 20,000,000 people. They didn't stop Maoist China from killing 50,000,000 people. When Nasser wanted to wipe out Israel, the UN politely left the region for the time allotted to get the job done. I don't recall Pol Pot living in fear of the UN. Iran toys with the UN, Kim Jung Ill does whatever he does to laugh at the UN.

The UN turns a blind eye to the Sudan, Somalia, and Serbia and lets people like Charles Taylor do his thing for entirely too long. It allowed itself to be enthusiastically corrupted by Saddam Hussein. It regularly appoints the most egregious violators of human rights to the very commissions whose mission is to stop the very behavior its sitting members exhibit as a matter of pride.

I'm just scraping the surface of the mass murder it has failed to stop, the hypocrisy it exhibits on a daily basis. It's peace keeping missions are ludicrous.

And the only argument you can mount in favor of this augustly corrupt body is--it's better than nothing?

Nothing might be better. I'm willing to give nothing a chance. At least it would be easier to park in New York.

They can't stop any of those things. It's outside of their charter.

The central tenet of the UN is a nation's sovereignty is sacrosanct. It can't stop genocide. It can't stop oppression. It can only act when a nation attacks another nation as when North Korea attacked South Korea or Kuwait was invaded by Iraq.

Admittedly it often fails to act, but that is due to the vetoes on the Security Council, vetoes which were pretty much required to get the big powers on board. If any of the big powers hadn't been part of the UN, as America hadn't been part of the League of Nations, the UN would have fallen apart very quickly. With the same results that the collapse of the League lead to, this time with weapons of mass destruction.

And you should be relieved that the UN is so powerless. If it was strong enough to do the things you want, it would be strong enough to force Israel to give back what it took from its neighbouring nations in 1967.

Yeah, the UN has major problems. But the alternative is worse, far worse.

11 Bob Levin  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 6:39:35pm

re: #9 Sergey Romanov

Stalinist Russia was pretty effective at elimination dissension up until 1988. Stalin himself died in the 1950s. Kruschev was no puppy. It was happening while the UN still had respect around the world. I wasn't really expecting them to address the deeds of Lenin, or anything occurring during WWII.

But during the heyday of the UN, the decolonialism of the 1950s, they certainly could have addressed the USSR, China, and Cuba--which I didn't mention above.

12 Bob Levin  Sun, Nov 21, 2010 6:53:14pm

re: #10 Romantic Heretic

Evidently they are strong enough to act in the mode of Public Relations. They can pass declaration after declaration--which they do when it comes to Israel.
But when it comes to genocide in Africa, nothing. When it comes to trying to at least state unequivocally that Iran is pursuing nuclear arms, nada.

They won't even take the moral stand and define terrorism. We could do this right here. Simple.

They don't have to be as corrupt as they are, nor do they have to tacitly give approval to genocide human right violations.

How did Iran get so close to being appointed to the Women's Rights whatever?

And by the way, history does not back your claim that Israel took land in 1967. Even it you could make a case for this, the issue in the Middle East is that Israel exists at all. The PLO was formed before 1967.

My overall point is that the UN has lost all legitimacy. It is synonymous with incompetence and corruption.

Are you saying that the collapse of the League of Nations led to WWI? I don't think that hypothesis will stand.

13 Bob Levin  Mon, Nov 22, 2010 12:28:08am

I wish I could go back into my comments and fix the typos.

The UN also had legitimacy in the 1960s, the early to mid-sixties, when Castro began to 'clean' Cuba of Western ideas--except baseball. The UN has never seriously taken on Castro's decimation of Cuban society.

The UN retained that warm glow even though its integrity had definitely taken a turn for 'becoming what you fight against', in the 1970s, as Yasser Arafat, gun at his side, spoke to the General Assembly.

And it has gotten progressively worse each year since. It has become a valuable tool for the very despots against whom it was supposed to fight, the very reason for its creation.

Down the line, issue by issue, the UN is on the side of oppression and corruption. At its best, it is incompetent.

14 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Nov 22, 2010 5:06:58am

re: #11 Bob Levin

Stalinist Russia was pretty effective at elimination dissension up until 1988. Stalin himself died in the 1950s. Kruschev was no puppy. It was happening while the UN still had respect around the world. I wasn't really expecting them to address the deeds of Lenin, or anything occurring during WWII.

But during the heyday of the UN, the decolonialism of the 1950s, they certainly could have addressed the USSR, China, and Cuba--which I didn't mention above.

Again, there is no doubt that USSR was totalitarian almost until the end. It's just, first of all, after Stalin most dissidents/critics weren't murdered. Second, the peak of mass lethal repressions and murderous negligence under Stalin was in the 1930s - most of the victims died in this decade, as well as in the first years of the Great Patriotic War (e.g. GULAG deaths peaked due to the difficult situation). It doesn't mean that in 1945 Stalin wasn't murdering, it was just done on a much smaller scale, not on a mass scale as before. So most victims that you mentioned were dead by the time the UN was created. Stopping other forms of repression may be a fair argument, but you brought up specifically millions of dead victims.

15 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Mon, Nov 22, 2010 5:11:31am

Hey, "nakhmish". If you take issue with something I wrote, state it openly.

16 Bob Levin  Mon, Nov 22, 2010 12:53:26pm

re: #14 Sergey Romanov

What I meant was that the totalitarian system under Stalin, that was still working just fine after Stalin was violating human rights on a mass scale. That murders had greatly diminished from the 1930s and 1940s might be indicative of there being significantly fewer potential victims rather than a sweeping wave of humanitarianism.

Again, there is no way I'm going to make a point that is has that type of problem with internal logic.

17 Bob Levin  Mon, Nov 22, 2010 12:55:55pm

re: #15 Sergey Romanov

Is this directed at me? Because if it is, I don't understand what you're getting at.

18 Lord Baron Viscount Duke Earl Count Planckton  Tue, Nov 23, 2010 2:44:07pm

Bob, my #15 was for user "nakhmish" who for some reason downdinged my pretty non-controversial statement.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2021-06-05 2:51 pm PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Train Songs Five
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
4 days, 3 hours ago
Views: 322 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 6
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Four
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
4 days, 3 hours ago
Views: 312 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 •
Train Songs Three
A hollow voice says Vaccinate the world!
4 days, 4 hours ago
Views: 311 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 •
Snarky Puppy - Trinity (Extended Version) Snarky Puppy never lets you down, they always come out bright and enthusiastically high on the sounds. Snarky Puppy - Trinity (Extended Version)From Snarky Puppy's new album, Empire Central (September 2022, GroundUP Music)Stream/Buy: orcd.co Written by Mark LettieriArranged by ...
Thanos
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 658 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2
Tweets: 2 •