Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The United Nations was founded out of the ashes of World War II for the noble purpose of ensuring that the earth would never know war or genocide again. The embers of the Nazi gas chambers were still hot. The barely alive, near corpses of Holocaust survivors staggered in the camps of Buchenwald, Auschwitz, Dachau, Bergen Belsen, Treblinka and other such place. The Nazis had finished slaughtering millions of people for no other reason than that they didn't fit the definition of "Aryan" (as if Hitler was blond and blue-eyed).
Japanese had just concluded an epic slaughter of Chinese. Numerous Japanese were cremated in the fires of Tokyo, and died in the mushroom clouds of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The world literally stank of slaughter and death.
The "solution" to the problems starting WW I hadn't worked. The French, Brits and US levied an oppressive "peace" on the Germans, which meant there was no peace. Not that the Nazis and Communists helped by taking it to the streets. The Middle East went from feudal satrapy under the Ottomans to a tinder box under the League of Nations mandates. Thus, progressives throughout the world united to form the UN out of the ashes of WW II.
Then things went badly wrong. Postage stamp nations were created at a furious pace after the implosion of the British, French, Belgian Portuguese and Dutch empires. The people in their former colonies were left in utter misery. With a few notable exceptions such as, eventually, India, "one man, one vote, one time" ensured that dictators sprung up, destroying whatever spunk and initiative these new nations possessed. Pakistan, much of Africa, and initially India degenerated into war and famine.
The formation of the UN did nothing to solve any of these problems. A corrupt crew of bureaucrats sprang up whose only mission was self-preservation. The dictators of these new countries picked "ambassadors" who got the cushy privilege of living it up in New York City, and running wild. Imagine the heaven of being supported by your own (corrupt) government, being able to amass thousands in unpaid parking tickets, and having as a "job" attending a debating society overlooking the beautiful East River of New York City. Simply irresistible. If is were only the waste involved, the UN would be inexcusable and in need of abolition.
Foreign aid is now largely administered through multilateral, faceless agencies. Thus, people in lands throughout the world can scream "death to the United States" with impunity. The United States is still largely funding the aid, but the check bears the name "United Nations". Thus, the US spends all of the money, receives all of the vilification, gets none of the influence that should come with aid.
Even worse, the aid does not reach the people. Do you really imagine that those pitiful people waving their arms in UNICEF posters really get a penny? No, the money is in their dictators' Swiss bank accounts or at best wasted in the not-for-profits' bureaucracies.
The Western nations get the distinction of being pilloried for relatively minor transgressions Meanwhile, unabated by the UN, slaughters continue in Rwanda, Sudan, Burundi, et. al. Mosques in Yemen explode. ISIS cuts off peoples' heads. The UN does nothing about Robert Mugabe's destruction of Zimbabwe, once a comfortable, middle class land. The UN grinds out a diet of one-sided resolutions against Israel, while ignoring the constant atrocities in Arab lands. Where is the U.N. when it comes to the continuing persecution of Christians in Pakistan, Libya, Syria and the Islamic State?
The UN is wasting money that ought to benefit the unfortunate. It is worse than the most reactionary conservative dreams that George Wallace or Ross Barnett could dream up.
I've posted on these forums more than once that the U.N. should be moved away from NYC to relocate in Port au Prince. There would be more needed benefit from that move alone than the loss to NYC, including the loss of criminal influence.
The U.N. in Haiti would first give the island nation attention that it needs, to help clean up and to develop monied tourism. Side benefits would include an idyllic resort for national leaders to meet, relax, confer, achieve, and mostly relieve the U.S., NY state, and NYC from that same criminal element that follows international corruption. The greatest benefit being the end of mass numbers of 'Diplomatic Immunity'.
I could add a '/sarc off' here but I really believe it's time for the U.N. to find greener pastures.
I've posted on these forums more than once that the U.N. should be moved away from NYC to relocate in Port au Prince. There would be more needed benefit from that move alone than the loss to NYC, including the loss of criminal influence.
The U.N. in Haiti would first give the island nation attention that it needs, to help clean up and to develop monied tourism. Side benefits would include an idyllic resort for national leaders to meet, relax, confer, achieve, and mostly relieve the U.S., NY state, and NYC from that same criminal element that follows international corruption. The greatest benefit being the end of mass numbers of 'Diplomatic Immunity'.
I could add a '/sarc off' here but I really believe it's time for the U.N. to find greener pastures.
Maybe Port Au Prince or Qatar for the summer, and Pyongyang for winter headquarters. I hear the skiing is great. </sarcasm>
All kidding aside, I think the U.S. and all other democracies should abandon the U.N. altogether. We are pouring our money down a hostile rathole.
I've posted on these forums more than once that the U.N. should be moved away from NYC to relocate in Port au Prince. There would be more needed benefit from that move alone than the loss to NYC, including the loss of criminal influence.
The U.N. in Haiti would first give the island nation attention that it needs, to help clean up and to develop monied tourism. Side benefits would include an idyllic resort for national leaders to meet, relax, confer, achieve, and mostly relieve the U.S., NY state, and NYC from that same criminal element that follows international corruption. The greatest benefit being the end of mass numbers of 'Diplomatic Immunity'.
I could add a '/sarc off' here but I really believe it's time for the U.N. to find greener pastures.
Maybe the U.N. could be relocated on land cleared by Hurricane Matthew. The "leaders" could ten supervise the squandering, err, spending, of the world's largess given generously to help.
On another thread, there is information about a similar party being thrown for Canada's First Nations courtesy of guilt-stricken Westerners:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
Yeah, we need to carry a lot of guilt for present day crappola like this:
Tell you what; I'll feel more guilt over the past lack of integrity shown to aboriginals by governments when they demonstrate they have any present day integrity based upon anything other than pointing a crooked finger and demanding cash...
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.â€"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,180 posts, read 13,461,836 times
Reputation: 19488
Quote:
Originally Posted by metroxian
I've posted on these forums more than once that the U.N. should be moved away from NYC to relocate in Port au Prince. There would be more needed benefit from that move alone than the loss to NYC, including the loss of criminal influence.
The U.N. in Haiti would first give the island nation attention that it needs, to help clean up and to develop monied tourism. Side benefits would include an idyllic resort for national leaders to meet, relax, confer, achieve, and mostly relieve the U.S., NY state, and NYC from that same criminal element that follows international corruption. The greatest benefit being the end of mass numbers of 'Diplomatic Immunity'.
I could add a '/sarc off' here but I really believe it's time for the U.N. to find greener pastures.
The UN is never going to move out of NYC, it's a great place to be, especially if you are getting all your expenses paid for. The UN also has large offices in Geneva and Vienna.
When Rockefeller volunteered to fund the UN buildings if they were built in NYC I thought that was a very bad idea. I still believe that it was a very bad idea.
I can't think of any place that I would inflict them on.
When Rockefeller volunteered to fund the UN buildings if they were built in NYC I thought that was a very bad idea. I still believe that it was a very bad idea.
I can't think of any place that I would inflict them on.
New York is a great city.
My vote for UN headquarters would be Aleppo, Syria so they could witness firsthand what their fecklessness and failure have wrought. Or if that were too uncomfortable, Tel Aviv, so they could see what a hardworking people can create. But my serious choices would be Aleppo, Benghazi, Sana, Yemen, or the Tribal Region of Pakistan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
