U.N. Resolutions - Do They Work?

[UK Skins Fan]

yupchagee wrote:

A little history. Britain dumped things on the UN after their situation became untenable.

Sorry, I'm well aware that most problems in the world are probably the fault of my nation. Although I'm not taking the blame for permed hair and flared trousers.

[UK Skins Fan]

Redskin in Canada wrote:

I do not know about you but I get a bit melancholic missing the good old days during the Cold War when this mess would not and could not have taken place. Oh! the good old days when we could obliterate humankind from the rest of the planet in a matter of hours. Stability or obliteration, a little scary but it worked.

Don't knock the Cold War - those heady days when there was only one enemy. Actually, there is only ever one enemy - ignorance. And that particular enemy hasn't been despatched yet.

[1niksder]

yupchagee wrote:

A little history. Britain dumped things on the UN after their situation became untenable.

Sorry, I'm well aware that most problems in the world are probably the fault of my nation. Although I'm not taking the blame for permed hair and flared trousers.

And you call that FULL discloser? You could never get away with dis-association of the perm and throwing them pants in there just makes you look guity

[dnpmakkah]

Why don't you stop worrying abut rule enforcement and worry more about your argument?

What above or anywhere in any of my posts make you think I am worried about rule enforcement? Where have I once said a person should do this or shouldn't do that?

I've watched this thread closely from the beginning, even made comments throughout it... there may even have been particpants who WERE warned privately... but you don't really need to worry about anything but yourself. Consider yourself warned... you would have got the warning privately had you not sought to challenge the rules publicly.

Thanks...I'm actually one of the ones who have been behaving myself and just trying to have respectful conversations that go back and forth...and I never "challenged" the rules...if I have I don't see it anywhere within the past 11 pages. But I appreciate the public warning.

You want to start a thread in Smack, be my guest. Otherwise, stop belly-aching and leave the moderation to those chosen to do so please.

Find me one post where I said "I WANT TO START A THREAD IN SMACK" and I never once tried to moderate anything or anyone...so I don't see what you mean by this. Maybe you have a post where I tried to moderate something. If you look at the below quote. One of the STAFF members said take it to smack

Goodness, I hate these political cat-fights. There have been several public warnings already. If it's simply impossible for dems and reps to get along (since merely being one qualifies as bigotry ), take it to smack.

And since I was the one who started this Topic...I responded by telling the STAFF member why I didn't place it there. See Below.

I used to post these in Smack but lots of people said that wasn't the correct place to post political topics. So I started posting them here. It would be fine except for the few of us here who can't handle the truth handed to them then revert to name-calling making it seem like it should go into Smack.

[yupchagee]

[
Was this thread about self defense or UN santions ... maybe it's about the price of fuel in Istanbul, we've been off topic so long I forget

The title of the thread is about the UN, but the initial post was an attack on the US govt & Israel. It was "off topic" as soon as it started.



dnpmakkah wrote:

Quote:
The United States was alone in voting against the resolution. Ten of the 15 Security Council nations voted in favor, and four abstained.


This resolution could have really helped stabilize the situation for a bit until calm was restored. But they should have known that it was going to get a veto. There is no way in hell that America would pass that resolution and anger Israel. If I were them I wouldn't even waste my time proposing a resoultion that goes against Israel because it almost never gets passed.

[dnpmakkah]

Hamas and Hezbollah as if they were nations... they aren't (they hold seats in the governments in the locations they are based but they run no nation.

Hamas might actually have some say in Palestine but thats not saying much since Palestine has never really been able to form a government of any kind.

Well I'd call it noble to advise the country that they may want to continue to do nothing like when they were asked for years to man it's own boarder to get Hezbollah out of the area and did nothing. Again Israel's dispute is with Hezbollah not the Lebanese goverment. They've been on the sidelines this long they might as well stay there

The great U.S.A is having a hard time stopping the violence in Iraq what makes people think Lebanon who is a week government to begin with can stop Hezbollah. Same goes for the years when people wanted the PLO to stop Hamas. If America is having trouble in Iraq and Afghanistan what make people think this weeker nations can do it.?

Again you point to the death toll after the start of the attacks and all those numbers are high when they should simply read 1 and 2

1 Israeli servicemember returned by Hamas and 2 returned by Hezbollah, it would be a lot more peacefull over there

Well I'm sure if you ask the Israelis what started this spat they would point to the kidnapped soldiers. If you ask the Lebanesse/Palestinians what started this spat they would say something different like the land occupation that has been going on for years. So if people think returning the soldiers is the means to restroing peace then there seem to be many people who does not know the root of the problems in that area.

[dnpmakkah]

You complained that I called you 1st an anti semite & then a bigot. I just pointed out that anti semitism IS bigotry, therefore I was consistent.

Where did I complain about it.

Ha ha ha. First I was anti-Semetic and now I am also a bigot.

Writing "Ha, Ha, Ha" hardly sounds like a complaint.

I didn't say that oposition to any Israeli policy was anti semitism. Denying Israel's right to self defense or even her right to exist IS anti semitism.

Well I'll try to look at all 11 pages one more time but I don't think I said once that Israel doesnt have a right to defend itself did I? Maybe you can find a post where I said that.

[UK Skins Fan]

yupchagee wrote:

A little history. Britain dumped things on the UN after their situation became untenable.

Sorry, I'm well aware that most problems in the world are probably the fault of my nation. Although I'm not taking the blame for permed hair and flared trousers.

And you call that FULL discloser? You could never get away with dis-association of the perm and throwing them pants in there just makes you look guity

I've exhausted all intellectual arguments at this point, so

[1niksder]

yupchagee wrote:

A little history. Britain dumped things on the UN after their situation became untenable.

Sorry, I'm well aware that most problems in the world are probably the fault of my nation. Although I'm not taking the blame for permed hair and flared trousers.

And you call that FULL discloser? You could never get away with dis-association of the perm and throwing them pants in there just makes you look guity

I've exhausted all intellectual arguments at this point, so

Finally someone comes along and properly buts a debate to rest

[BossHog]

The part when you said,

It would be fine except for the few of us here who can't handle the truth handed to them then revert to name-calling making it seem like it should go into Smack

... the staff member stated IF someone wanted to start name calling to take it to Smack. Your further interpretation of where it should or shouldn't go, isn't required. That's a moderator's decision to make.

... but I wasn't looking for a debate, just to encourage you to stick to the general topic of conversation, and leave any type of decision to the moderators.

I think you've got so caught up in something you're passionate about, that you've somehow mistaken me for actually caring. Further discussion about the scemantics is really just taking the thread even further off topic. If you have a concern, PM it, otherwise, please confine your posts to the topic at hand. Thanks.

[Irn-Bru]

Find me one post where I said "I WANT TO START A THREAD IN SMACK" and I never once tried to moderate anything or anyone...so I don't see what you mean by this. Maybe you have a post where I tried to moderate something. If you look at the below quote. One of the STAFF members said take it to smack

Goodness, I hate these political cat-fights. There have been several public warnings already. If it's simply impossible for dems and reps to get along (since merely being one qualifies as bigotry ), take it to smack.

And since I was the one who started this Topic...I responded by telling the STAFF member why I didn't place it there. See Below.

I used to post these in Smack but lots of people said that wasn't the correct place to post political topics. So I started posting them here. It would be fine except for the few of us here who can't handle the truth handed to them then revert to name-calling making it seem like it should go into Smack.

I never asked for an explanation. All that I wanted was for the personal attacks to cease or for those who are mad at each other to go to the Smack Forum. There is no reason that this thread can't be in the Lounge, and there is no reason that those who resort to name-calling can't do so somewhere other than this thread.


If you want to post political threads in Smack, feel free to do so.

[Irn-Bru]

Sorry for the double correction post; didn't see BH's until after I posted.


To bring it back to the topic at hand: I would still say "No," even after reading all of the arguments presented in the thread. A little simple-minded perhaps, but there are very good reasons to think that the UN doesn't do much good at all.

[UK Skins Fan]

Actually, I think the debates that go on here might be quite similar to those that go on at the UN. They might use bigger words, and quote more authoritative sources, but the mud still gets thrown all the same.

In my humble opinion, the UN will never possess the singular unanimity of political will, backed up by military capability, that will resolve issues. Then again, I come from a nation that has exhibited unanimity of purpose and military capability on numerous occasions, without ever resolving any issues either. What those two attributes have achieved is the survival of the nation itself, and that might be something that the UN should consider.

[yupchagee]

You complained that I called you 1st an anti semite & then a bigot. I just pointed out that anti semitism IS bigotry, therefore I was consistent.

Where did I complain about it.

Ha ha ha. First I was anti-Semetic and now I am also a bigot.

Writing "Ha, Ha, Ha" hardly sounds like a complaint.

I didn't say that oposition to any Israeli policy was anti semitism. Denying Israel's right to self defense or even her right to exist IS anti semitism.

Well I'll try to look at all 11 pages one more time but I don't think I said once that Israel doesnt have a right to defend itself did I? Maybe you can find a post where I said that.

You criticize everything Israel does to defend itself. If that is not denying Israel's right to self defense, it a distinction without a difference.

[yupchagee]

Hamas and Hezbollah as if they were nations... they aren't (they hold seats in the governments in the locations they are based but they run no nation.

Hamas might actually have some say in Palestine but thats not saying much since Palestine has never really been able to form a government of any kind.

There is not & never has been a nation called "Palestine"

Well I'd call it noble to advise the country that they may want to continue to do nothing like when they were asked for years to man it's own boarder to get Hezbollah out of the area and did nothing. Again Israel's dispute is with Hezbollah not the Lebanese goverment. They've been on the sidelines this long they might as well stay there

The great U.S.A is having a hard time stopping the violence in Iraq what makes people think Lebanon who is a week government to begin with can stop Hezbollah. Same goes for the years when people wanted the PLO to stop Hamas. If America is having trouble in Iraq and Afghanistan what make people think this weeker nations can do it.?

Again you point to the death toll after the start of the attacks and all those numbers are high when they should simply read 1 and 2

1 Israeli servicemember returned by Hamas and 2 returned by Hezbollah, it would be a lot more peacefull over there

Well I'm sure if you ask the Israelis what started this spat they would point to the kidnapped soldiers. If you ask the Lebanesse/Palestinians what started this spat they would say something different like the land occupation that has been going on for years. So if people think returning the soldiers is the means to restroing peace then there seem to be many people who does not know the root of the problems in that area.[/quote]

Define "land occupation".
Explain how this "occupation" came about.
Hamas & Hizbollah considered tel Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem etc to be "occupied.
You are saying that Israel does not have a right to exist.[/quote]

[Cappster]

Can't we all just get along? Everyone on these boards can agree that Redskins are #1. wooooooooohooooooooo

[Deadskins]

Yupchagee, I don't want to begin to sort out the quote problems with your last post, but as to land occupation:
When Israel was attacked, by several Arab nations, including Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq, they not only defeated their attackers, but actually captured territory that was not part of the original partition of Israel. Against all international conventions, they did not return the land to the original owners, but instead developed settlements on that land. This is mainly what is referred to as the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. These are the main areas of contention these days, not Israel proper.

[1niksder]

Yupchagee, I don't want to begin to sort out the quote problems with your last post, but as to land occupation:
When Israel was attacked, by several Arab nations, including Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq, they not only defeated their attackers, but actually captured territory that was not part of the original partition of Israel. Against all international conventions, they did not return the land to the original owners, but instead developed settlements on that land. This is mainly what is referred to as the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. These are the main areas of contention these days, not Israel proper.

I agree with this less Iran and Syria (they don't want any form of Israel to exsist)

[yupchagee]

Actually, I think the debates that go on here might be quite similar to those that go on at the UN. They might use bigger words, and quote more authoritative sources, but the mud still gets thrown all the same.

You're demeaning this forum by comparing it the the UN.

[1niksder]

Actually, I think the debates that go on here might be quite similar to those that go on at the UN. They might use bigger words, and quote more authoritative sources, but the mud still gets thrown all the same.

You're demeaning this forum by comparing it the the UN.

I fixed your last post so I could properly quote it and others could read it. I guess what I'm trying to say is your use of the quote button is demeaning to this thread

[yupchagee]

Yupchagee, I don't want to begin to sort out the quote problems with your last post, but as to land occupation:
When Israel was attacked, by several Arab nations, including Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq, they not only defeated their attackers, but actually captured territory that was not part of the original partition of Israel. Against all international conventions, they did not return the land to the original owners, but instead developed settlements on that land. This is mainly what is referred to as the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. These are the main areas of contention these days, not Israel proper.

Israel did not violate international law because:
1) The land in question was not recognized as part of any state.
2) Israel had no one with whom they could negotiate (remember the 4 "no's"? The Arabs continued to deny Israel's right to exist.

These areas are not the mian area of contention. Hamas (the gang in control in Gaza & the "West Bank" (Judea & Samaria) & Hizbollah explicitly deny Israel's right to exist. The only Arab countries who have agreed to Israel's right to exist are Egypt & Jordan.

I know of no precedent of defeated aggressors making such demands. If the Arabs know they will get the land back after a war, they have no disincentives from starting wars.

[Countertrey]

what makes people think Lebanon who is a week government to begin with can stop Hezbollah.

If a nation claims sovereignty, then they must be accountable for actions taken on their soil which would constitute an act of war against another sovereign. Beyond that, the nation of Lebanon has made no effort to reign in Hezbollah, despite their acknowledged mission to destroy a sovereign nation (Israel).

There is a price to pay, in light of Hezbollah's use of Lebanese sovereign territory to carry out their missions. Loose the crocodile tears.

[dnpmakkah]

I think you've got so caught up in something you're passionate about

I'm passionate...yes. But not enough to lose sleep over it. When I started this thread the main point was to critize the entire U.N. process, and in this particular case the crisis of the past week. Whenever the U.N. has a resolution on the table it either

A. Takes them forever to yea or nah it.
B. Do not enforce it.

and the fact that a veto holding nation can kill an entire resolution is a very bad idea...I think it should be majority rule. However....somehow or another it came out as Anti-American when it really wasn't meant that way. But people will see what they want to see and I can't help them with that.

you've somehow mistaken me for actually caring.

I don't know that just made me laugh.

If you have a concern, PM it, otherwise, please confine your posts to the topic at hand. Thanks.

No concern here. So far no one has said anything offensive. I was taking it in as just plain old good fun...and if I did have a problem with it you would have received a PM from me....it's all good.

[dnpmakkah]

There is not & never has been a nation called "Palestine"

Shoot...then what are we debating about? So what nation do the Palestinians have? Maybe the U.N should step in and give them a nation of their own like they have done in the past for people of other nationalities.

[dnpmakkah]

Can't we all just get along? Everyone on these boards can agree that Redskins are #1. wooooooooohooooooooo

That might be the only comman agreement with us all.