More UN corruption. *sigh* those globalists at it again

[Edric O]

You've ignored my point.

As far as the people of country X are concerned, the ruler of country Y is ALWAYS a dictator - because they did not elect him!

Case in point: I live in Romania. I did not elect George Bush, and I have no say in what George Bush does. I also did not elect Kim Jong-Il, and I have no say in what Kim Jong-Il does. From my point of view, what does it matter that George Bush was democratically elected BY OTHER PEOPLE? Since *I* had no word in it, Bush might as well be a dictator as far as I'm concerned. The same applies to the leader of any other country.

Your whiny complaints about unelected dictators in the UN don't seem to take into account THAT small fact. And your "solution" - expelling dictators from the UN - would have only one effect: Making the UN as impotent as the League of Nations.

[emprworm]

You've ignored my point.

As far as the people of country X are concerned, the ruler of country Y is ALWAYS a dictator - because they did not elect him!

Case in point: I live in Romania. I did not elect George Bush, and I have no say in what George Bush does. I also did not elect Kim Jong-Il, and I have no say in what Kim Jong-Il does. From my point of view, what does it matter that George Bush was democratically elected BY OTHER PEOPLE? Since *I* had no word in it, Bush might as well be a dictator as far as I'm concerned. The same applies to the leader of any other country.

Your whiny complaints about unelected dictators in the UN don't seem to take into account THAT small fact. And your "solution" - expelling dictators from the UN - would have only one effect: Making the UN as impotent as the League of Nations.

rofl.

[Edric O]

When you throw tantrums like that, I stop to think whether I should reply to your post or give you some candy.

Since it seems you understood absolutely nothing, let me explain it better for you:

Your argument was that dictators should not be allowed to cast a vote in the UN because they are not democratically elected leaders, and so they do not represent the people they are making decisions for. But I pointed out that whenever the leader of nation A makes a decision that influences the people of nation B, that decision is taken by someone who does not represent the people of nation B. As far as nation B is concerned, it doesn't matter whether the leader was democratically elected by the people of nation A or not. Either way, the people of nation B certainly did not elect him.

As far as Americans are concerned, what's the difference between a leader that was elected by the French and a leader that wasn't elected by anyone?

Do you see my point now? Or do I have to put it in simpler terms for you?

As for your ridiculous examples, if my father started taking decisions that affect the United States, without being voted or approved by the people of the United States, then YES, he might as well be a dictator as far as you're concerned. But last time I checked, my father wasn't the president of any country.

[Anathema]

increase the representation of the US and Canada to more than 1 representative, and only then will I endorse the UN.

....

I lack words for this particular quote. Especially nice ones.

Upholding economical and diplomatical relations with countries and at the same time denying that their rulers are the legitimate representatives of a country is somewhat hypocritical. Cut all ties with Saudi Arabia, China, Pakistan etc. and mabye your statements will have some credibility.

[emprworm]

i cant believe you pose idiocy like that Edric.

[nemafakei]

"i cant believe you pose idiocy like that Edric.  you know....i've never seen romania.  therefore there is no difference between an invisible purple unicorn, and romania.  romania doesn't exist (using your logic)

do you believe in a Flat Earth Edrico?  You've never seen it.  And since the universe revolves around you, there is no difference between a cube earth, a flat one, or a round one.  "

To what was this a response? It seems to have been posted in the wrong thread.

"uhhhh...that he was elected by those whom he represents?"

The problem here is that you see the UN as a convention of people pushing their own nation's interests, rather than of people looking for common goals.

The point is that the UN should be there for each member-state to push forward its own interests, but for all its members to join in the pursuit of a common good for the world. That is why a French worker at the UN is no less a delegate of Ethiopia or even Switzerland than they are there as a Frenchman. It just so happens that the membership has to come from all countries to prevent countries claiming that they are being picked on by the UN or claiming that the UN is just a vehicle for western supremacy.

[emprworm]

"The problem here is that you see the UN as a convention of people pushing their own nation's interests, rather than of people looking for common goals."

thats the problem.  a free nation has nothing in common with a dictator state.

thats like saying that a particle physicist has something in common with an alchemist.

those who have moved forward should not be forced to regress to appease the lowest common denominator, instead, the lowest common denominator needs to be pushed ahead.

the UN has it backwards.

[nemafakei]

A democracy and a dictatorship are both composed of people. In the former, the majority of the people have power (or semblance thereof), in the latter, only one does. Nevertheless, the point is that the UN is created for the common good of humanity.

The lowest common denominator is the human species, and no matter what our compound denominators - democratic, dictatorial, etc, we all must work to that.

[Dunenewt]

if Europeans enjoy subjecting themselves to rule of dictators, great.  enjoy.

just dont demand that the US, where freedom was bought with blood,

I can't believe that you have never been taught European History before.  You seem so clever and knowledgable about all this political stuff yet you have very little historical knowledge.

[DukeLeto]

half of the truth is still a whole lie.

purge the filth from the UN (remove all ability to dictator states to make decisions over the affairs of free societies) and only then will it begin taking steps towards credibility.

Who decides how to define who stays and who goes?  You?  Bush?  What if France was put in charge of the choices?

What if - Horrors! - we actually treat everyone EQUALLY?  THe United Nations is intended to bring peace and unity to the ENTIRE world, not just the "rich-white-conservative-christian-male dominated" part of the world.  The government of say, Iran should have just as much say as the government of China or the US.  If you want to pick and coose who's in from your elitist friends, stay in NATO.

Besides, it's not like the General Assembly can force anyone to do anything; that's the job of the Security council.  And guess who's got that locked up?

[emprworm]

A democracy and a dictatorship are both composed of people. In the former, the majority of the people have power (or semblance thereof), in the latter, only one does. Nevertheless, the point is that the UN is created for the common good of humanity.

The lowest common denominator is the human species, and no matter what our compound denominators - democratic, dictatorial, etc, we all must work to that.

the UN, by giving additional power to dictators, obviously do not have any motive to work together, nor any motive to help the common good of humanity.

[nemafakei]

Read my post again. I am not suggesting that the dictator be the voice of anyone.

[Dunenewt]

Read my post as well.

We split far more blood than you did fighting for our freedom, even including all the native americans.

[emprworm]

spilt blood for what?  So countries like spain can bend their knees to Al-Quaida?  So Europe can include the votes of dictators in the UN in governing their nations?

[otheymzefedaykin]

You seem so clever and knowledgable about all this political stuff yet you have very little historical knowledge.

Oh noooo ! It's too difficult for them to learn European History :D...it's too much tnan American History !

And I don't say anything about Geography :P !

If Americains didn't know (officially) dictatorship, it is because they live in a bubble ! 

Did you have note that the americains never knew the war?  Without the civil war....

[emprworm]

If Americains didn't know (officially) dictatorship, it is because they live in a bubble !

[otheymzefedaykin]

Because they have the money !

It's because they haven't been ruined by a war....

The WWI and WWII ruined Europe....

The war ruined Africa...

1929's crisis ruined Germany (and bring Hitler to power !)

etc...etc....

It is the AMERICANS that have miliatary bases all over the world

Yes, and IT is the problem !

what bubble?

Why not ? Did you asked yourself "Why USA were attacked in 9/11 ???" It's not without reasons.... Why USA ??? Why not Germany, England, or the asshole of the world ???? Reconsider that !

And if Americans don't live in a bubble, why your (old) president don't know "Who is Milosevic ?" ::)

[emprworm]

"Did you asked yourself "Why USA were attacked in 9/11 "

uhhh..because of Muslim extremists?  If you are on their side, (or sympathize with them in anyway) then you are scum like they are.

[Dante]

Look at it from everyone's point of view. Nobody is scum, it's just that some people are forced to think differently. Did it ever occur to you that maybe heavy-handed outside interference from the likes of Britain, Russia, and the USA is what's driving some of these people?

[Wolf]

It's possible that the leaders of Muslim extremist groups may not even believe in what they are doing -- many do, I am sure, but it is possible that some do not. They may just be in it for their own self-interest; the same drive (only on a national level) that drove so many countries to imperialism.

[Dunenewt]

spilt blood for what?  So countries like spain can bend their knees to Al-Quaida?  So Europe can include the votes of dictators in the UN in governing their nations?

I'm sorry that I'm not saluting a Nazi but we have freedom, incase you haven't realised I come from UK and I don't see us being controlled by anyone, and the same applies to most other European countries.  I doubt you could name most European countries without looking them up and you obviously don't know much about Europe.

[emprworm]

Look at it from everyone's point of view. Nobody is scum, it's just that some people are forced to think differently. Did it ever occur to you that maybe heavy-handed outside interference from the likes of Britain, Russia, and the USA is what's driving some of these people?

no.  in case you missed the Islam thread, they have been doing this for 1300 years.

[Dunenewt]

But we need to focus on the future

[Dante]

no.

[emprworm]

They've been fighting each other for a long time. Attacking outsiders has only come to pass when outsiders interfered. Besides, it's not like the rest of the world has been free of war.

rofl.