U.N. missions for booze-soaked orgies

Nie Trink Wasser

Graduate Poster
N
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
1,317
that oil for food money has to go somewhere !


A book by three current and former U.N. employees about peacekeeping operations portrays wild parties with alcohol and drugs, and convicts and mental-asylum inmates passing as soldiers.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20040527-121439-5861r.htm

A favorite drink among the U.N. personnel at the parties was the "Space Shuttle." It was made "by distilling a pound of marijuana over a six-week period with increasingly good quality spirits. It is a work of love, and the final product is an amber-colored liquid that tastes like cognac. We drink it with rounds of Coke."

They're drunk as sailors, rape vulnerable Cambodian women and crash their U.N. Land Cruisers with remarkable frequency.
Click to expand...
 
Sounds like my friends experience in American army base in Germany..

But sure go on.

UN rocks. Best political thing of 20th century.
 
daenku32 said:
Sounds like my friends experience in American army base in Germany..
Click to expand...

Your friend raped woman?

UN rocks. Best political thing of 20th century.
Click to expand...

Is that kinda like the "Pet Rock"? Where can I find a UN rock?
 
I'll bite, and assume NTW is trying to say we should do away with the UN. Of course, it's impossible to figure out just what he's trying to say exactly, since he hasn't actually given his opinion. Again.

This being the case, Nie, would you care to say what should be in place instead of the UN, keeping in mind why the UN was created?

If this isn't the case, would you like to say what your opinion is so us lesser mortals don't have to second-guess you? Or are you afraid that if you give an opinion that your infallibility will come into question?
 
the UN is a failure of great proportions.

I'm hoping to get some discussion as to the disgusting deals and actions they have been getting away with executing throughout the world while we all have our attention diverted to something else...

all Im asking for is discussion, but Im sure you'll just dictate my intentions for me...
 
Are you calling for the removal of the UN, or just reforming it? Hard to tell, even with your next post. You don't stimulate discussion by posting a link with a smart-alec comment. I'm surprised it's taken you this long to figure that out.

If you are calling for the removal of the UN, keep in mind that by this logic we should do away with the US senate every time some scandal-or-other comes to light.
 
Mr Manifesto said:
If you are calling for the removal of the UN, keep in mind that by this logic we should do away with the US senate every time some scandal-or-other comes to light.
Click to expand...

You're comparing the UN to the US senate? Their functions and purposes couldn't be more different.
 
Tony said:


You're comparing the UN to the US senate? Their functions and purposes couldn't be more different.
Click to expand...

If that analogy is too complicated for you, allow me to put it this way: You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
 
Im asking you to discuss whats going on with the UN.

the matter of it being done away with or reformed does not matter.....so try and stay on topic.

you can't seem to discuss these things.

are you an apologist for permission of rape, bribery, and genocide ?

those buzzwords must only useful to you when conservatives are being questioned
 
Mr Manifesto said:


If that analogy is too complicated for you,
Click to expand...

It was a false anology.

You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Click to expand...

You'll have to provide reason why the baby is worth keeping, or for that matter, even exists (in a desirable state).
 
Nie Trink Wasser said:
Im asking you to discuss whats going on with the UN.

the matter of it being done away with or reformed does not matter.....so try and stay on topic.

you can't seem to discuss these things.

are you an apologist for permission of rape, bribery, and genocide ?

those buzzwords must only useful to you when conservatives are being questioned
Click to expand...

Yes, Nie, I'm an apologist for rape, bribery and genocide. :rolleyes: That's why, in the post above, I suggested - perhaps too subtlely for some - that reform would be a better way to go.

" the matter of it being done away with or reformed does not matter.....so try and stay on topic." Uh, my point is we don't know what the topic is. That's why I've asked you, several times, to explain it. You can't whine about people being off-topic if you won't state your position.
 
Tony said:


It was a false anology.
Click to expand...
That is highly moot. But I'm willing to concede the point for the sake moving the debate along.


You'll have to provide reason why the baby is worth keeping or for that matter, even exists.
Click to expand...

The baby is worth keeping unless you can think of another means for policing aggressive nations peacefully. We've seen how a unilateral approach works in Iraq: not all that well. The UN, among many other functions, was created as a means to try, in a fair a way as possible, to limit if-not-stop wars of aggression such as the one that Germany perpetrated.

It hasn't always been successful. No institution ever is. If you can think of a better way to fulfil the UN's functions, I've yet to hear it.
 
Mr Manifesto said:


If that analogy is too complicated for you, allow me to put it this way: You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Click to expand...

But the question is whether there really is a baby with the bath water. In other words, is there any real benefit to the world in having the UN (as an all-encompassing organization) around?

The U.S. senate has a purpose - It serves the democratic intentions of the United States, and allows the views of its citizens to be expressed the majority of the time.

In contrast, since most countries are dictatorships, the U.N. doesn't have the same function of representing its populations. Plus, many of the actual functions that it does serve can be accomplished in other ways. For example:
- Some organizations in the U.N. (such as the WHO, which does do some good work) can be "spun off" as an independant organization, eliminating much of the overhead involved in the U.N. as a whole
- Other non-U.N. organizations exist that can take over some or all of the diplomatic functions of the U.N., such as NATO, the World Trade Organzation (I think they're non-U.N.), the EU, etc. Such organizations already exist and are fairly efficient given their narrow focus.
 
Concering the WTO: I think you'll agree that trade falls pretty much outside the scope of the UN. It's also peculiar that on the one hand you argue that the UN doesn't represent it's people because of the number of dictatorships that are members, yet you don't seem to notice that those same dictatorships are members of the WTO. So, why bother with a different model?

As for NATO, that is an alliance. Accordingly, it only has NATO interests at heart. For example, you'd probably find that Russia wouldn't agree to measures that NATO implements over measures that the UN implements. To use the 'alliance' model would be to risk having alliances vs alliances like we had before WWI. We know how that turned out.
 
Mr Manifesto said:

The baby is worth keeping unless you can think of another means for policing aggressive nations peacefully.
Click to expand...

What's your defintion of peace?

If anything, the UN has taught us that it's impossible to police aggressive nations peacefully.

We've seen how a unilateral approach works in Iraq: not all that well.
Click to expand...

What unilateral approach?

The UN, among many other functions, was created as a means to try, in a fair a way as possible, to limit if-not-stop wars of aggression such as the one that Germany perpetrated.
Click to expand...

And it's been a failure since day 1.

It hasn't always been successful. No institution ever is. If you can think of a better way to fulfil the UN's functions, I've yet to hear it.
Click to expand...

I think the UN needs radical reform. It needs to serve the interests of democracy, individual and human rights and the promotion thereof. Not be used as a tool to protect dictators and despots.
 
Tony said:


What's your defintion of peace?

If anything, the UN has taught us that it's impossible to police aggressive nations peacefully.



What unilateral approach?



And it's been a failure since day 1.



I think the UN needs radical reform. It needs to serve the interests of democracy, individual and human rights and the promotion thereof. Not be used as a tool to protect dictators and despots.
Click to expand...

A lot of empty rhetoric here. What's your definition of 'failure,' exactly? How does the UN "protect dictators and despots"?
 
I'm shocked the united nations being portrayed as an ineffective waste of time and money

Shocked its taken so long for everybody to realise
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom