Debates are a Waste of Time

He asked why ditching American military bases on the other side of the globe would make us safer. He also insinated that there is no reason to quit spending money we don't have because nobody is going to do anything about it. Then he went on to deny that the U.N. is taking control of our national parks and monuments. The point I made was as to how he would feel about foreign military bases here. And we all know the answer to that. It's not hard to figure this out.

You really covered the bases there, leaving out only extraterrestrial interests.
Click to expand...

I didn't want to bring that up since you can only see them with these special sunglasses.
 
Then he went on to deny that the U.N. is taking control of our national parks and monuments.
Click to expand...
And I will continue to do so until I see something to the contrary. The UN can't do anything, worldwide, much less within the CONUS without US approval and help. If the US were to stop donating, the UN would collapse. It is our wayward child, still on the dole.
I didn't want to bring that up since you can only see them with these special sunglasses.
Click to expand...
I have mine, straight from Rowdy Roddy himself. Not you?
 
He asked why ditching American military bases on the other side of the globe would make us safer.
Click to expand...
He asked that rhetorical question because he knows that there is no way to do it and make our country safer. Anyone that knows what it takes to defend this country (as Destructo6 and I and many many others on this board have) understands the reasons why.

Oddly enough there are people in the public eye who advocate ditching American military bases on the other side of the globe. Often they are people like Pat Buchannan. A person that in my opinion couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag. When people like him speak to what would best defend our country, I just roll my eyes and laugh. How could I do otherwise?

Now if he wanted to give me advice on how to best cook a corned beef and cabbage dinner, then he would have my attention. If he wanted to explain how one goes about losing an election in an abysmal fashion, again, I would be riveted. Defend America? :rolleyes: bwaaahaaahaaaahaaa
 
Gents, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but the U.N. does have legal authority (given by our Congress & acellerated by Billy boy) over some of our national parks under the guise of being environmental protection. They don't OWN them, but they do have final authority.


http://www.unesco.org/mab/brlistEur.htm



Just do a search on United Nations and National Parks and you will get a ton of hits. Many of them will be wacko sites, but there will be some reliable info.



Destructo, while it's true we can squash the U.N. like a bug, like any enemy, doing that requires the will to do it. The nation doesn't recognize the problem. That equates to immunity for the U.N.
 
the U.N. does have legal authority (given by our Congress & acellerated by Billy boy) over some of our national parks under the guise of being environmental protection.
Click to expand...
Quart-
Your link shows the Reserved Biosphere projects in the US and other countries. While I have a major problem with the project which seeks to use our money to prohibit us from accessing our land, I don't see where the UN has control over it. Control remains with the National Park Service.

At one time, I had researched the voluminous treaties in this regard and, that too, demonstrated no actual "control". I'm really not interested in Blogger level interpretations. What can you give me that carries authority or credibility?
Rich
 
Neither the UN, nor UNESCO, have any authority over what are termed "World Heritage Sites". (The site lists all of the "Sites" and what countries have to do to be listed.) At its essence, this is simply a list of unique or endagered places scattered around the globe, and many are in the US. A site can be placed on the list, which indicates it is a valuable site (and great for tourists to visit), and can be removed by either the country or UNESCO.

Really, simply think of it as a "Tourist Site" list.

Quartus,

Sorry, I wrote the above thinking that's what you were referring to, then I visited your website link for "Man and the Biosphere". This is like most UN activities, which "encourages" action and use. It is completely voluntary among nations, and carries on many good deeds, particularly among under-developed countries.

The World Heritage Sites are part of the MAB program, as I understand it.

Roon
 
Last edited:
Neither the UN, nor UNESCO, have any authority over what are termed "World Heritage Sites".
Click to expand...
Vs.
A site can be placed on the list, which indicates it is a valuable site (and great for tourists to visit), and can be removed by either the country or UNESCO.
Click to expand...
Doesn't power to remove a site constitute a measure of control and/or authority? Or am I missing something? :confused:
 
Doesn't power to remove a site constitute a measure of control and/or authority?
Click to expand...
Considering that we have more natural parks, wilderness areas and monuments than any other country, I doubt that they would want to drop us from their lists. We don't pay our dues to the U.N., and there are any number of other reasons they would drop us if they really wanted. All due respect Fred, I think it's a real stretch to say they have any control or authority over us. They need us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top