I think they want power and money. The easiest way to get it is from the US government before the US citizens know what is happening. The UN wants to control US soldiers, as well as try, imprison and tax US citizens. This much I know from UN proposals.
I think we should move the UN facilities to Africa. It will help the economy there, help the delegates be more in touch with the people of the world, and get them out of our hair. :wink: :roll:
I think we had this as a topic before. :)
Newby, where do you come from?
Yeah we have, in fact it was our first 10 page topic ) But what the hell, why not relive the topic. Newby, do me a favor and register.
The United Nations is an organization designed for the little guy. The idea of it is to have a world wide democracy. In the past, sometimes its worked and sometimes it hasn’t.
I think they want power and money.
Don’t we all?
The easiest way to get it is from the US government before the US citizens know what is happening.
All Countries who pay their dues pay a fixed percentage of their GDP. The US has Veto power to look out for the needs of it’s citizens.
The UN wants to control US soldiers, as well as try, imprison and tax US citizens.
The UN has no standing army, and does not “control” US soldiers. The UN does not impose taxes upon anyone, except in the indirect form of UN dues which all countries are supposed to pay. Who owes the UN the most money? The United States.
Imprison US citizens? Your joking right? If a country imprisoned a US citizen that wasn’t breaking that country’s laws, Strongman Bush would start a war.
The UN is the last way for other countries to get a say as to what happens to them.
Nato is nice for its participants. They tend to be wealthier countries, typically not readily assailed by other forces, and i’m sure it’s a fun little club, however people from countries without these privileges have few other recourses. The US did something honorable by helping to establish it, and guys like Ralph Bunche (sp?) did quite well by the UN.
Of course the UN ultimately looks out for the interests of America - the long term ones (as opposed to the short term ones - like saving Americans money). In theory the UN helps to keep the peace through multiple forces. This is nothing but good for the US as:
a) A stable country is less likely to bomb US property/people than one that is less stable
b) Through various charitible programs (UNICEF etc.) the UN empowers other nations to eventually develop their own economy and social programs. Again good for the US - more trading partners, and a larger pool of applicants to draw from when the labour market shrinks (not good for the countries losing literate citizens, of course).
c, d, and e - call it good Karma - if the US were to pull out, it would sour relations with its allies, as well as its enemies.
Also does the US even pay its UN dues? at all?
w.r.t. moving it too another country - Africa - untenable. The US provides too much support staff and security that another country might not be able to.
Also does the US even pay its UN dues? at all?
Yes, and it’s a A LOT of money.
The US owes hundreds of millions of dollars to the UN, but our dues to trickle in now and then.
ya the US doenst pay its share
Who owes the UN the most money? The United States.
Maybe. But which country has the most soldiers sent into action to fight for a UN cause? The United States. Which country has lost the most soldiers when it comes to fighting for UN resolutions? The United States. Who pushes the UN to enforce their resolutions? The United States.
I think we more than make up for our slow payments.
Imprison US citizens? Your joking right? If a country imprisoned a US citizen that wasn’t breaking that country’s laws, Strongman Bush would start a war.
As he should. I’d back him up 100% if he did.
ya the US doenst pay its share
Heh, how much does Canada have to pay?
i haven’t heard that Canada was owing any money,
and D:S - from what i’ve seen, the US tends to “lose” proportionately as many soldiers as other nations, unless they’ve sent in proportionately more, as is their want when their national interests are at stake.
Each country pays the same amount in relation to their GDP. Hardly unfair.
Very few UN soldiers have died, ever. The UN is not a military organization. The UN is a diplomatic organization. It’s purpose is to avoid war. It has done so many times. A prime example is the Cuban Missle Crisis. Without the UN during those 13 days, there probably would have been a Nuclear war.
I’m not surprised that very few UN soldiers have died. Those are the soldiers which are sent on “peacekeeping” missions afterwards, to keep the people civilized. Who are the soldiers which actually have to win the fighting before those guys can go in? The United States. They’re the one’s who do the fighting.
Send some UN soldiers into front-lines combat and we’ll see if you still claim a low casualty rate.
D:S this doesn’t happen that often either. I don’t think you understand the concept of “UN Peacekeepers”.
Contrary to popular opinion, the US does not intervene in every skirmish around the world. The UN wouldn’t want them too. The UN basically tries, via diplomatic means, to decrease the fighting between two countries. They then send in troops to police the area - not to fight everyone at once, or anything like that. It’s not often that the US goes in to kill everyone before the peacekeepers begin their mission. If this happened, the UN peacekeepers would get nothing done. They would have no credibility, their peacekeepers would be brutalized by the people they would be trying to help, and life, in general, would suck for them.
Sarejavo, which you might be thinking about, was a NATO affair and to begin with. The peacekeepers mostly prevent Croatian and Muslin reprisals and keep the weapons numbers down.
Guys, I understand what you’re saying, and I agree with you!
What i’m saying is that WHEN there IS fighting to be done, it’s most likely going to fall to the responsibility of the US to provide the most military.
As I just said
the UN is not a military organization.
It never has been, it never will be. However, there are UN peacekeepers and representatives in more places than you’d think. Pick any Civil War in Africa, and you’ll find UN soldiers there. Theres thousands of Peacekeepers on the Ivory Coast. Theres a lot in Asia, mainly in Pakistan/India, trying to prevent a war, and in Nepal. The UN has done a lot since the Cold War ended.
I didn’t say it was a military organization!
For example: When the UN got involved with Iraq back in '91 (or whatever is was), who did most of the fighting to liberate Kuwait?
And Korea… And Vietnam… but what matter does it make? :-?
It matters becuase I think that people are too critical of the United States for only one aspect of membership in the United Nations.
We may pay our dues late, but I’m saying that we compensate for that by risking the lives of our American troops in defense of countries all over the world, for encounters such as you listed above. No other country even comes close to shipping the amount of soldiers that we do, and UN conflict or not, our soldiers are fighting for everyone.
So I think people need to lay off, and think about what really matters.
We may pay our dues late, but I’m saying that we compensate for that by risking the lives of our American troops in defense of countries all over the world, for encounters such as you listed above. No other country even comes close to shipping the amount of soldiers that we do, and UN conflict or not, our soldiers are fighting for everyone
Uh, compare the amount US has to pay to all other countries. That’s A LOT of money. 300,000+ million a year?
Yea, something like that. Kind of ironic, huh?
Our government taxes the hell out of the richest people in our country, and then the UN taxes the hell out of the richest country in the world.
What goes around comes around. :D
