Why Does the USA Put Up With the UN?
 

Ya know, it's so predictable. This disaster is only hours old. We don't even know the magnitude of the disaster yet and some friggin' Norwegian pinhead from the UN is already telling us we're not doing enough to help. U.S. bashing has become a popular sport amongst these minor league nations. But they all know, when all is said and done, we're the ones who will bear the brunt of the financial burden to help the affected countries get back on their feet. We always have. We always will. It's a thankless job for sure.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041228-122330-7268r.htm

Pinhead:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1104267319.jpg

Without the UN, there would be no UN directives for countries to disobey, and therefore we could not invade said countries.

I thnk the Pinhead in question has recanted. Someone has reminded him that we are paying 40% of the UN bills..

Wrong!

Had the UN not existed, we would have had a real armistice with Iraq. When they violated that, there would have been immediate action (assuming non-Chamberlin-like leadership in our country), not years of bureaucratic wrangling.

Screw the UN why do we put up with Pakistan?

After 911 Bush gave the taliban a set amount of days to turn over UBL or else, same went for Iraq with a deadline.

Why don't Bush tell Pakistan you have 2 weeks to turn over UBL or face a ton of crap.

Failure to turn him over means 100% sanctions, meaning no business with the enemy law. No IT jobs over there, no Dell customer support, nothing Fk their whole infrastructure and US reservse the right to go in and get UBL ourself.

But noooooooo, the US is a big p$ssy and sends our jobs to the same country harboring UBL. WTF? This is so $ss backwards and upside down, send our IT and jobs to where ever UBl lives.

We threaten all the IT jobs and watch Pakistan cough up UBL in a NY minute. Instead we send them all our jobs and let their local thug dictator propaganda for the wars.

I agree in part with red ufo on the Pakistan thing. We shouldn't put up with them.

Problem is, they are the Romania of the Middle Ages or the West Germany of the Cold War, if you will. They are what stands directly between us and the threat. That puts us in the unfortunate position of having to deal with a military dictator who freely exports nuclear technology and undermines all our efforts in the area.

I tend to believe that if Pakistan wasn't nuclear, we would have treated them something like Afghanistan. But it's hard to justify attacking someone who is making every appearance of cooperating. The UN went ballistic over us attacking a regime that was uncooperative in every way, shape, and form--they'd at least have the veneer of a good argument for condemning us for attacking an "allie".

Hey fella's :)

Let's not forget that there is a world out there. The US of A is just a part of it. Let's all just get along, eh!

<i>"The US of A is just a part of it."</i>

The difference is we're the part of it with the checkbook.

Curt
With the USA being the richest country it should have the deepest pockets. Everyone do their part, right?

That's my point exactly. Everybody loves to complain about the USA ...... until disaster strikes. Then they automatically assume we will ride in on our white horse and save the day. And we do.

So far, the USA has pledged 35 million dollars to the relief effort, as "a downpayment". I predict by the time this is over several years from now, the USA will be into billions, not millions - this for an area of the world that is predominately Muslim ......

So how about our loudmouth 'friends and allies' in Europe? The 25-member EU - who have a combined economy <u>larger than the USA</u> - have pledged a grand total of $4 million ....... this includes pinhead's home country of Norway. But that's typical and expected.

America, the Great Santa. :rolleyes:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=16473

cegerer

If this happened in the US. Instantly they put some price tag on it like 20 billion. But this is probably a hell of a lot more. So a few million is like offering up a few pennies from the millionares.

But I agree this is not time to spin this into partisanship. Is it even an issue or a placed scandal by drudge

I dont know where they got their numbers (The Center for the Study of Popular Culture ) but according to Agence France-Presse Norway already gave $8 Millions. Canada seem pretty cheap also at $5 millions, almost 25 cents per habitant.:rolleyes:

France $166,000 - As just reported on the news.

What I enjoyed was Mr. Undersecretary-General Pinhead's suggestion that we just raise our taxes. Always a pleasure to get advice on our domestic policy from a man who lives in the United States under diplomatic immunity and pays no taxes.

Of course, these funds and more are essential to the UN, for once they install themselves at the scene they'll need to support their usual massive portable infrastructure.

Interesting sidenote: just after the fall of Bahgdad a delegation from Eastern Europe visited Iraq to consult on nation-building and strongly advised the Iraqis not to invite the UN. Waste, inefficiency, corruption and incompetence were cited as reasons. One particularly civic-minded Bosnian was infuriated that the UN refused to observe the strict conservation regulations in order to maintain a luxury lifestyle in the local hotels.

Once again the global community shows their collective asses in the love (your money) hate relationship with the US.
tisk tisk...One day we should learn from our mistakes and do nothing but point fingers and sit it out.

Good reason to stay with the UN is contained in a proverb often credited to the Russians:

"Keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer".

Better question: Why does the USA put up with Donald Trump's bad excuse for a comb-over?

Name a country that sent money after all the FL hurricanes?

But 15 million is nothing when the world knows the US spends 6 billion a month on Iraq. Mike Tysons makes more money if he loses a fight than that.

News is Bush only has 15 more tumbleweeds to clear, then a few rounds of fishing and he'll parrot some text Rove told him to say.

Sending money to Florida is like sending snow to the eskimos; we prefer to send you water bombers when California is burning.

Yes, where was the undersecretary pinhead when Florida was being pouned? I don't recall him taking the rest of the world to task for not pouring massive amounts of aid into the region. Hell, I don't recall a single mention of any nation sending any form of aid to help people who had lost everything.
I'm personally sick of this SH_T ! Screw the rest of the world; a bunch of ungrateful, short memoried bastards tht only need us for our money or military might. What do we get in return? Squat.
Let these UN a-holes take care of the world's problems on their own & keep our money for ourselves. God Dam them all.

This is a total joke. W. is not out there biting his lip and hes a bad guy. Give me a break. They are just beginning to survey the extent of the loss and damage. Before this is over, the US Taxpayer and US private citizens will have donated the most. What are we going to do now - release $100 bills out of B-52s as they fly along the coastlines..

Correction:

Sending money to Florida il like sending snow to the eskimos; we prefer to sell/rent you water bombers when California is burning.

Not that we expect aid from anywhere, but the rental of emergency equipment during a crisis is hardly charitable.

Of course I think the U.S. should and will do more to help in the tsunami crisis, but complaints about the size of our gesture are graceless.

The whole world forgets that charity is optional. When it ceases to be voluntary it becomes a tax. Not happy with the size of the gift our taxpayers sent you? Kiss our rich American asses.

Red -
The US put up $15MM immediately, dispatched relief teams and navy patrols (which, as any peacenik likes to remind us, are not cheap) and made a commitment to remain in the reconstruction "for the long haul" -- Colin Powell. What is the magic you believe will occur if the US just says "OK, here's a blank check"? We've committed to remain and reconstruct ... but we're not the world's underwriter; this is not our open-ended loss; and we will, as we have always done, provide more cash and assitance than anyone else.

ASIDE-
Here and on some other thread, you seem to equate W's not dropping what he's doing to run back into some damage control mode. You've said some inane stuff on these hallowed boards before, but that's pretty close to the top. As tho' W's personal presence is going to get a check cut faster?! The US gov't makes the commitment and it follows it through, whether the Prez. is in DC or not. Your comment is, simply, stupid.
END ASIDE

As for the UN:
The United States supplies more than one-fifth of the United Nations' total budget (and 57 percent, 33 percent and 27 percent of the budgets for the World Food Program, the Refugee Agency, and Department of Peacekeeping Operations, respectively). We've been the United Nations' biggest donor every year since 1945.

But no matter how much money we (as the US) provide to the UN, in absolute dollars or as a % of the UN budget, when something goes wrong, the US is expected to dig even deeper than it does and WAY deeper than anyone else.

Yeah -- the US, the same evil, capitalist, unilateralist, interventionist, imperialist entity that is constantly maligned by the *****bag states in the GA -- or on the Human Rights Commission. Syria and Libya on hectoring the rest of the world about human rights from the UN pulpit? And some still think the UN is worth anything more than the fair market value of its Turtle Bay property?

The UN is not a philanthropic entity, it is a political coalition for nations to thwart the US. It does not prevent famine, it does not prevent genocide -- period. Where it "acts", situations tend to get WORSE for the locals, especially if they actually rely on the UN to defend them. Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Ivory Coast, etc. The litany of UN failures is nothing short of spectacular -- so to conceive of it as an entity principally known for what it almost universally FAILS to do is evidence of the blindspot the capital-L Left has for the UN b/c of what it claims to do.

The UN did not free Kuwait, solve Ethiopia, help Yugoslavia, liberate Afghanistan, prevent slaughter in Rwanda, and certainly does not keep NK from invading SK or China from walking over Taiwan in a long weekend.

And btw, American citizens send $34 billion in private aid around the world each year. The entire UN budget is about $3.5 billion. Americans -- qua citizens, not bureaucracy -- are bright enough to know that you don't provide the corrupt middleman (UN) the opportunity to skim "fees" for administering aid where and how it's needed. Oil-For-Food; 'nuff said.

I prophesy that whatever the US gov't spends to assist (both $ given and costs) it will dwarf any other nation's contribution when all is said-and-done (though the media silence on this point I also prophesy will be deafening). I prophesy further that Americans themselves will likely provide more money than either their government or any group of other contributors.

JP

Wow! All the cons are saying the samething. Must have been todays talking points from your handlers.

Ya, why not?

Were money laundring a fortune at 6 billion a month with no end in site in Iraq alone. What's another few billion? Hell its not like were ever going to payback the Rothschilds anyway. Our grand kids will have to deal with it, so put in on Amerikas credit card debt, since our dollar is bottoming out and the moniteray system is always warning of a collapse. Might as well go broke in style.

Hell we are paying Iraqis alot of money so they don't go broke and kill soldiers. Blackwater contractors, the mercinaries get paid a fortune.

You guys are acting like all this money is real? Its not, its just an illusion, there is no federally balanced check book. Its a bottomless pit, Cheney reffered this as their turn at the piggy bank anyway.

Hell if this were the middle east the US wanted to bomb another part of it would be a blank check to do that.

Bottomline: US has an endless cash flow to bomb and kill. But limited funds to save mankind.

I told U Red that we were beyond level 3..it's the begining of level 4..and has been since the advent of the UN in the 1940's....The true purpose of the UN is to end civilization or SWF...Strife, War and Famine....

USA is in for 35 million as of yesterday. I have not heard if there was more aid offered today but I did hear that Canada has just put forward about the same amount today (40 million CDN).

The difference is Canada is 30 million population, USA is 300 million.

Most other nations are giving as well.

Here we go:

I guess we're expected to let the UN siphon off 50% of the aid that's given, never tell us where the money went, and not end up really ever helping the people in need.

Ya, by the monkey setting up his own money laundring system he can make sure Halliburton distrubutes the cash for 50 dollar bottles of water. We all know the monkey isn't about secret deals and has the most transparent government ever run.

When he doles money out every penny gets to where it needs:rolleyes:

Whatever happened to the people who need the aid....
And who cares if the US is stingy or not....giving aid is an act of Charity..and the Bible says Charity begins at home....so giving ANYTHING is above and beyond the call of duty...

I think this country is really fouled up.....when the political oposition chastizes the President for not acting quick enough...it's not as if he let days or weeks go by....whats next ....are they going to criticize his BM's....This state of affairs is intolerable...and if this country can't lighten up it is DONE...

Bushy ain't the secular version of the AntiChrist for christs sake...

BTW...UFO...the last Presidnet to be described as a monkey...was Abe Lincoln...who is considered to be the best President the USA has ever had....

Ah, Tabby..

To some he is the AntiChrist

To others he is the savior returned

Somewhere in between, lies truth.

Yeah he is just a MAN, trying to do his job!

Wait a minute. His job is to lie to the country to get our kids to fight his wars?

Like just another guy doing his job the best he can, and in spite of this occasionally screwing up? I'm sure this pretty much describes all of us.

I find it funny that the standard for American Presidents (and America itself) is absolute perfection, but the standards for others is relative. The standard by which the UN is judged certainly isn't perfection, let alone reasonable competence.

HIS WARS??? Bushy and crew didn't run an airplane into the WTC...

Also pray tell which Presidnet hasn't lied in the Modern Era. ....

When I constantly hear rabid anti Bush or for that matter rabid anti Clinton (for example) rhetoric I start to heavily discount the credibility of the writer....simply there is something else going on with the correspondent that has nothing to do with the political situation...but personal issues...Nobody is a complete saint nor a complete demon....the truth lies somewhere in between, and if presented that way that persons credibility rises in my estimation...

And sometimes lying can be a good thing.

I hesitate to say this because I know it will be picked apart, but:

In 1942, when asked about Doolittle's raid, I seem to recall FDR saying something along the lines of the planes came from "Shangra La". Obviously, if he had given the actual details on the raid, he would have placed many servicemen at risk.

I'm fairly certain that our government, maybe even the President, sometimes intentionally say things that are untrue to test the reaction of, or to mislead, our various enemies.

No they signed off on others to do it for them. The reason is peak oil. They know 20 years from now oil will be getting scarce. So US, Israel and Britian decided to get the last major oil resources and control them to garuntee our way of life for as long as they can.

They needed a radical reason to invade Iraq (first) then Syria, then Iran, finally Saudi. Read Crossing the Rubicon, splains alot.

In order to pull it off they needed a new enemy but not one you couldn't just find and kill off quick. A hard to kill bogeyman was need to pull out anytime you needed it politically. So UBL was the best choice.

UBL didn't and could have done 911. He just a pussy hiding and putting out propaganda tapes. If he could attack the US again he won't. That would unify the US with Europe again and he don't want that. But Bush does, he needs another attack to get his approval ratings up and to blame Iran for it. I'm sure right now Cheney is plotting the next one.

Wouldn't it have been easier to just fire a missle into Isreal from Iraq?????

Say hi to the pill lady for me:)