Another U.N. story not getting any media or forum play....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

I am planning a one-man march on the White House to get Bush to donate the entire U.S. GNP to a blind trust for the U.N.'s exclusive use

---

you want to bankrupt the UN :ohmy:

Quote:

---

and also get him to sign the Kyoto Treaty.

---

I would like that. Even if global warming isn't what scientist make it out to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Ah-but you are too late, my friend.

I have become the U.N.'s biggest fan and supporter.

I am planning a one-man march on the White House to get Bush to donate the entire U.S. GNP to a blind trust for the U.N.'s exclusive use, and also get him to sign the Kyoto Treaty.

That should do for a start.

---

Well...too bad I'm not one for much bullshit talk, parables, or ka-ka.

Fuck the UN. I'm talking direct logic here.

Use logic or STFU!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Ah-but you are too late, my friend.

I have become the U.N.'s biggest fan and supporter.

I am planning a one-man march on the White House to get Bush to donate the entire U.S. GNP to a blind trust for the U.N.'s exclusive use, and also get him to sign the Kyoto Treaty.

That should do for a start.

---

:dry: Sheesh! Converts are always so zealous.


:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Ah-but you are too late, my friend.

I have become the U.N.'s biggest fan and supporter.

I am planning a one-man march on the White House to get Bush to donate the entire U.S. GNP to a blind trust for the U.N.'s exclusive use, and also get him to sign the Kyoto Treaty.

That should do for a start.

---

A couple of paracetamol and a wee dram should aid your recovery. :whistling

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigboab

A couple of paracetamol and a wee dram should aid your recovery. :whistling

---

Not interested, Boab.

BTW-Congratulations on your 5000th; a milestone of significance for one who spends significant time in the Drawing Room.

I doubt I'll ever get there (again). :)

j2

I do get what you are on about even with my wondering just what it is you think the UN is not doing that it should be.

However a hypothetical question:

The UN sends "peacekeepers/aid workers" into a trouble hotspot. These UN operatives consist of British, french and American soldiers.

just for this example one night a group of American troops indulge in the activities highlighted in the original post.

Who is responsible...Annan? Bush? or both?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

j2

I do get what you are on about even with my wondering just what it is you think the UN is not doing that it should be.

However a hypothetical question:

The UN sends "peacekeepers/aid workers" into a trouble hotspot. These UN operatives consist of British, french and American soldiers.

just for this example one night a group of American troops indulge in the activities highlighted in the original post.

Who is responsible...Annan? Bush? or both?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

The UN is always a "sticky" group when it comes to accountabilty.

Are the donor countries at fault or the UN?

If it's the UN then it's leader needs to take action.

If it's the donor country then it's leader.....

---

I asked the same question with no one giving answers......... :whistling

Last answer, so file this one away.

In the scenario you describe, vid, I would say the U.S. personnel should be hauled before your I.C.C., and dealt with summarily and according to international dictates; just as with those who enter our armed services, you pays your pesos, and you takes your choice.

If U.S. personnel commit an offense under the flag of the U.N., they are subject to the U.N.'s justice.

Annan, of course, should have something more to say than, "While I regret the actions of the few, I am not responsible."

Your scenario overlooks the repetitive and endemic nature of the offenses committed over the tenure of Annan's reign, which I feel is an important aspect of the current situation, but, there you are.

Ok I know you said last answer.

I am glad that you feel the international criminal court should be utilised for such things (even if you have little faith in it before it has had time to be tested). Of course this does raise a problem with the fact that we have not signed up to it which is why I specifically used the usa as the example...that and it hits directly at home.

I wonder what the reaction would be if the ICC actually did try to prosecute American soldiers


Not a supporting reaction I fear

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Last answer, so file this one away.

In the scenario you describe, vid, I would say the U.S. personnel should be hauled before your I.C.C., and dealt with summarily and according to international dictates; just as with those who enter our armed services, you pays your pesos, and you takes your choice.

If U.S. personnel commit an offense under the flag of the U.N., they are subject to the U.N.'s justice.

Annan, of course, should have something more to say than, "While I regret the actions of the few, I am not responsible."

Your scenario overlooks the repetitive and endemic nature of the offenses committed over the tenure of Annan's reign, which I feel is an important aspect of the current situation, but, there you are.

---

Good answer j2. Good answer. ;)