Printable View
Exactly.Quote:
Originally posted by Wrent
There is something DONE after the incident. That is the point.
UN person has 20 incidents brought against them, and there is zero action taken. A soldier gets dishonorable discharge is a HUGE deal, a giant fucking black mark that will always be there.
There is a huge difference between isolated incidents that are DEALT with appropriately and a systemic pattern of gross abuses that are widespread and ignored.
And let's make all the representatives grandmothers, and they can sit around knitting while they talk about the state of the world. They might as well as it is. The actual representatives have very little power - they're just figureheads. It's the bereaucratic departments "underneath" them that do the work and have the power. It is those departments who need either to be shackled, or to be set right.Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
Leave the UN in place as nothing more than a body that facilitates communication between member nations. Beyond that, any ability to DO something needs to be removed. The corruption, abuses, and graft (and apparently nepotism) are too great.
I'm not trying to justify it. I'm just pointing out that there is nothing especially evil about the UN that produces this bad behavior, but that it can arise in any governmental body, even those that are supposedly responsible to their populace.Quote:
Originally posted by Aristotle
Seriously folks, don't even waste your time making this argument. People love to do it, but it is absolutely logically invalid.
Shadarach tried the same thing a bit earlier.
"Oh, someone else is bad so I'm not!"
You can't justify bad behavior with other bad behavior. So just cut it out, seriously.
as shitty as these incidents are, I don't see it as grounds to dismantle the UN.
Pedophilia and child porn are unforgiveable in my opinion, but closing the UN isn't the answer.
Are you saying no good comes from the UN and it's organizations around the world?
My sister worked for the UNFAO in Rome, and she did some pretty amazing work.
Yes, the UN is wrong for not dealing with the corruption; but this hardly makes them stand out, or make them an isolated case.
Im a still sitting on the fence on this one.
One side i prefer smaller organizations and the corrupt state the UN is in is quite intolerable due to maybe lack of transperency.
The other, I see what Kestra's says. The other sectors of the UN are working well.
UNICEF helping out the Tsunami Orphans, WHO helping durin SARS, and the UN helpin gather charities and aid for victims of the recent tsunami.
I cannot see the UN as totally useless, yet.
Sure there is.Quote:
Originally posted by Grantref
I'm not trying to justify it. I'm just pointing out that there is nothing especially evil about the UN that produces this bad behavior,
The UN has a complete lack of accountability and it is ruled by the lowest common denominator.
The current "PC" attitude totally dominates it and the bureaucrats involved are able to use that as a shield.
It is unique in its ability to get away with incredible abuses and dodge bllame because it espouses to have a superior moral authority.
Disbanding the UN may and may not help anything. Certainly most of its subgroups (UNICEF and such, the ones who are doing the good work) ought to be able to work without the UN on top of them.
It's really the military side of the UN that has all the problems. There's nothing wrong with having a body of representatives to help organize these sorts of groups, to help organize aid, and so on; but the "United Nations" as a body has acquired a bad name. So... Let's disband the UN, and form a "World Communication Conference" that meets as often as the UN currently does, consists of the same representatives, and has only one purpose - communication. Then bring Unicef, Unesco, WHO, etc, all under this new banner - or send them independant maybe - and we eliminate the stigma of past UN failures, and go on to do things right.
It's not likely to happen, of course, but suppose it could, would it be a good thing?
Here is the thing, I made no mention of the UN. My line of logic was around the idea that having a semi automatic weapon, a uniform and buddies to back you up (or the equivalent) when you fuck up in foreign countrys seems to give you the idea that you can get away with things you wouldn't dream of doing in your own country.
I talked about the Australian military, specifically I was talking about a fellow who got shot up in East Timor on a patrol and what the SAS does about un-professional behavior among their ranks. I also mentioned some experiences with horny US Navy guys, no mention of the UN was made at all.
On the subject of the US Navy, bloody oath there is a factor of local women dressing to impress the troops, don't get me wrong. As anyone who has come off a ship on shore leave will tell you.
Defending the UN would entail mentioning them. I tend to try and stick to stuff I don't have to read information on the internet about when dealing with serious topics.