Does Ban Ki-moon give the UN a chance?

Y

yomama

Moderator
I'm impressed. Ban Ki-moon has now ordered an investigation into all spending to all nations, including this most recent incident. I'm impressed because he has only recently taken office, and has taken the first logical step at ridding the coruption by looking at spending, where it's going, and why.

Whether any results will be seen is up in the air for now. I can only hope that Ban Ki-moon is much better than Kofi.
 
No..he's trying perhaps to reform an organization that simply needs to be dismantled...or at the least removed from US soil.
 
I see it as a formidable first step. Make everybody show their cards. The U.N. is so corrupt, I think hardly any good becomes of it anymore. Just my .02.
 
Corruption or not corruption..the UN itself is anti American. Their goals as an organization are more often than not completely unconstitutional from an American point of view. Since their goals violate our Constitution, why are we a member nation? Why do we allow such an organization to base itself on our home soil?
 
To answer both of your questions, Danzig, I think it boils down to appeasement. NOT a good thing. It might look dangerous to the general public and most countries, but I see it like this. If we are the most powerful nation in the world, then wouldn't we set an example by cutting ties with an organization that does not rightfully represent?(did that make sense?)
 
Now, that's a first!:D
To put it bluntly:
If we don't pull out, does Ban Ki-moon stand a chance to turn things around for the U.N.? And do you think it will be to the extent that the U.N. respects our laws?
My answers are:
1. slim
2. none
 
Again, agreed. :D Nothing wrong with agreeing a person when they are right. Of course, IF I am ever wrong..I expect you to mercilessly beat me to death with FACTUAL information to prove me wrong! :D
 
Most "factual" infomation is usually interpretation of the author. On top of that, there's "factual" information that counters other "factual" information, "factually" speaking!;) With that, I wouldn't beat you sensless with it. What good does that do? I get beaten up quite a bit on this forum and it doesn't feel great sometimes.:cool: If you're respectful of my viewpoints, I'm brought up to reciprocate. I'm the first to admit, though, I'm pretty passionate in what I believe in, and may come across trying to shove my opinion down others' throats. But, I mean no harm. Just a outgoing kinda fella!
 
I have the same problem. I am very passionate about freedom. I'm afraid that I react poorly when I think others don't respect freedom as much as I do. I tend to be pretty intolerant in that regard. But I don't wish to offend anybody..I just tend to be a bit too outspoken sometimes.
 
Some information can be factual. For instance. I can quote the Bill of Rights. It's an indisputable fact that it says, for example, that accused persons have a right to trial by jury. If the fedgov comes out with a piece of crap legislation which abrogates that right..then it is a FACT that the legislation violates the Bill of Rights. Yes or No?
 
Just by only reading from your question, yes. But look at all the amendments to the Constitution to clarify the context.
But, I see where you're coming from.
 
Back to the topic..who cares whether Ban Ki-Moon gives the UN a chance? The UN has had almost half a century to prove themselves and you know what? They've proved themselves alright! They've proved to be a bunch of freedom hating socialists who want to bleed America dry while hating everything our country is supposed to stand for.


So at least for me (and I can only speak for myself) the question has no meaning.
 
...has taken the first logical step at ridding the coruption by looking at spending, where it's going, and why.

Whether any results will be seen is up in the air for now.
Click to expand...

IMO, how well the UN will be run will be known after the results of his first steps. Unfortuately, I feel that the outcome will be drawn out, not known for at least 2 years down the road and the results will be, at worst, wrist slaps.
 
Since their goals violate our Constitution, why are we a member nation? Why do we allow such an organization to base itself on our home soil?
Click to expand...
Veto power.

We can muck up alot of their plans if we are a member state and use the Veto. We should perhaps look at not contributing as much $$$ if we can. That and mabee buy them some land in France to move to.
 
They'll go the way of the league of Nations

If you all remember your history...we had something like the United Nations, before...only it was called the "league of nations".
they did pretty much what the UN is doing now..talk alot about their problems instead of fixing them.
They got sorted out...and I believe the UN will fold like a cheap suit before long as well.
people may not believe it..but history DOES repeat itself.


Man CAN fly, sadly, its only in one direction.
 
I recently was sent the new issue of the Rifleman. An interesting article stated that the UN recently voted on a resolution banning small arms. The US was the only decenting vote. They know they are powerless because in response the UN said that it will only work if all nations agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top