Well, the decision came up for a vote yesterday, and sadly, the proponents of getting our country - and the taxpayers pocketbook - out of the U.N.'s hands - came up short -- very, very short.

But, for the first time, I actually wrote my Congressman - an e-mail, but still - urging him to vote for Rep. Ron Paul's amendment that would completely remove financial contributions to the U.N. and the U.S. membership from them as well.

The vote was something like 350-72 or whatever, but still, those 70+ representatives deserve recognition for such a bold stand.

To see how your Congressman/woman voted, click here:

http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2003&rollnumber=364



It IS time to get US out of the U.N. though - way past time.

http://www.getusout.org

I explained that alreadyy. The scenario I presented is different. In my scenario, China invades asia for no good reason. This would be taken as a bad thing for almost every country on earth. They would not want China invading, unless they were in a direct alliance with it.

Iraq didn't invade anyone. France, and Russia , and China, did sell weapons to Iraq, but if Iraq started invading middle eastern countries for no justifiable reason, France and China and Russia would want to stop Iraq regardless. Do I need to convince you more, or do YOU understand what I'm saying?

quote:

---

The most disturbing article was the one about tracking down Jessica Lynch and other POWs, one of the holding cells they were moved from contained Jet batteries used to torture the POWs with...MADE IN FRANCE

---

Yeah, but i don't think that violated sanctions. Let's change the UN into a cultural exchange forum. It makes much more sense than letting the UN be a political assembly. Politics screw things up.

email if ya want.

also...lets not forget...the majority of the UN backed the United States. France, Russia and Germany ect. were only big deals as members of the Security Council.

This is an interesting topic (your e mail) should I post here, email you, or post somewhere eles, or just tell you some other time?

quote:

---

So what were you implying about my quote? That the U.N. wouldn't attack China in that particular scenario? Because it definitely would. The reason the U.N. didn't immediately attack Iraq is that Iraq didn't DO anything.

---

What I am saying is it would depend on how many member countries were selling nuclear and other weapons to China at the time. Which is the exact reason they failed to back us against Iraq. What more proof do you need other then the Rockets from China, the Airplane parts from France and the Nuke Cores from Russia? Because if you need more...I have it. The most disturbing article was the one about tracking down Jessica Lynch and other POWs, one of the holding cells they were moved from contained Jet batteries used to torture the POWs with...MADE IN FRANCE.

I can't give specific examples, but I know the UN has done a lot of work in containing African wars (the largest foreign deployment in the world are the UN soldiers stationed all over Africa, I don't think any US forces are in Africa). And aid is a major part of the UN's purpose, don't forget that.

Well, we're already the UN's police force, so I don't think much would change, I think the UN could best be used as a cultural exchange forum. But, i know what your sayin.'

Hey, check your email.

I'm saying, in general, it is good because, if it wasn't there, there would be no place to make pacts and laws and regulations on a large scale. Every country on earth could have whatever weapons it wanted to, and it wouldn't be afraid to either. I think it'd be just another arms race waiting to happen in different countries all over the world. Without the U.N., the U.S. would have to take on that burden, which is not something we could handle world wide. Being in the U.N. forces countries to work together and, this is so true, results in countries being less of a potential threat than if the UN weren't there. Do you see what I'm saying?

I don't know about that, I surely can't think of any examples.

But you must surely admit, icm91, that simply being a member of the UN encourages other countries to abide by it's laws and regulations. It helps keep down the crazies.

The UN couldn't take any measure other than passing sanctions. You see the problem with the UN is that all its actions are symbolic only because it can't enforce it's own laws and resolutions upon it's member nations.

Yes, I love that attitude as well. Japan is a rock. Japan will do whatever it wants, and it don't give a d@mn about something like that.

So what were you implying about my quote? That the U.N. wouldn't attack China in that particular scenario? Because it definitely would. The reason the U.N. didn't immediately attack Iraq is that Iraq didn't DO anything.

And turkey's got a lot of respect from me for doing the democratic thing by listening to their people and refusing to support the US despite the chance to gain billions from the US. Talk about democratic spirit and principles, brings a tear to my eye. *sniffle*

quote:

---

Through the U.N., all countries on earth are allies.

---

In theory maybe...

quote:

---

If China started invading Asian countries for no reason other than for their own profit, what would happen?

The U.N., that's what.

---

In a perfect world, as we have already realized our own "allies" will refuse to back us if they have other political or capitol gain from it. I won't mention names because I don't have a problem with the people and I don't feel like being a "basher" today. But those heads of those governments have lost my respect...entirely. And on top of that Japan has gained even more respect from me for refusing to back down even though they had alot of money they could have made by going against the USA. Some of us still value human lives over money...

The U.N. is one giant democracy that protects the planet. If China started invading Asian countries for no reason other than for their own profit, what would happen?

The U.N., that's what.

Through the U.N., all countries on earth are allies. The U.N. would strike back with the combined force of basically every country on earth if something like that ever happened, which would put a quick end to it. So it's good.

Also, the U.N. delivers aid all over the world.

It's a place where countries go to negitiate. I think it's good for us to have that.

LoL . . . *chuckles*

This is so funny. Faaloun had this to say:

"I cannot believe how self centered and stuck up you republicans are. Because the UN wouldn't do what you want it doesn't work? Morons"

. . . and simmerdown89 had THIS to say:

". . .so if they pulled out of they UN they would have nothing to justify their wars and arrogance."



Actually, this has *nothing* to do with what the Republicans want/don't want and the US needing justification for-- get this-- DEFENDING ourselves.

What this is about is a broken bureaucratic organization that needs a major overhaul. One person mentioned that the UN helps prevent wars. Uhhhhhh . . . if you consider talking and talking and talking and talking a way of preventing wars, then you're a better man than I am.

However, back on planet Earth, that's not the way things are handled. If you look back upon thousadns of years, you will see that humans have solved things among themselves through wars. And, if I have it correctly, even *God* wasn't above using FORCE to settle things.

I mean, c'mon . . . the UN is a JOKE. Last time I checked, countries like Iraq, N. Korea, et al, didn't and still don't give a rat's rear end about some law-- yet WE'RE supposed to follow every last rule when it comes to DEFENDING ourselves? Whoever thinks that needs to wake up and come back to planet earth.

Do you REALLY think that Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, and the British & Roman empires (when they were such) would have abided by the UN if there was such t thing in their time? HELL no!! Gimme a break!

See, the thing I'm trying to point out, is that there ALWAYS have, and ALWAYS will be wars and rumors of wars. Even the BIBLE says that that's how the End Times are supposed to come!

Sooooooo . . .heh. For those of you who think the UN has *any* relivance to human nature, you're sadly mistaken.

Yes, the UN is a great idea. However, when WE'RE the ONLY ones who seem to be abiding by it (and putting ourselves in jepordy at the same time) I see no reason for it.

Faaloun, that is so true. A nice, concise description behind why Republicans hate the U.N.