World's Policeman

Big_Z said:
03USMC said:
And Advise the UN that we will provide Humanitarian aid only. No military aid to include transport. Or money earmarked for military purposes.
Click to expand...

The UN would probably wither away and die if we did that.
Click to expand...


Z. You say that like it's a bad thing.
 
It actually could be. The UN actually does do some useful things such as organizing humanitarian aid distribution. They do a lot of good projects here and there. Just again it's not covered by the press because they're hardly newsworthy.
 
Yes they are good at somethings. But in it's current configureation it needs to be gutted. The old Guard run out and reconfigured.
 
Whispering Death said:
I think your sentiments are more along the line of most Americans. I really don't think that there is going to be enough public support for any actions in Europe, non-taiwan/Korea Asia, or Africa. If anything happens there I think America is just going to say 'too bad' and kick it down to the U.N. for them to debate and do nothing about.

I think America is going to stop looking out for the world and start looking out for itself.
Click to expand...

last time that attitude was around it ended with pearl harbour
 
I don't think anyone is refering to a scenerio like the Japanese in China, or Nazi Germany running amuck in Europe. We were talking in terms of Somilia, Haiti, Kosovo etc. Peace Keeping and stablization operations. Not all out Aggression. There is difference.

But spin it how you want.
 
If anything, it'll answer a few things.
There's a lot of popular belief that if the US just disengages from the world, the anger and violence aimed at America will be stopped. If this is true, then everyone's a winner. If America gets hit, then it proves that the Americans were right all along.
 
First off, Americans pay for for I think it is 1/4 of all the UN budget and what do we get for it? Stabbed in the back at every turn. I support wholeheartedly stepping out of the UN or at least cutting our finances like in half.

Secondly...

the_13th_redneck said:
II also remember in Iraq, a Colonel, I think an African American, was discharged for firing his pistol to scare an Iraqi prisoner.
Click to expand...

Complete bullshit. He was from my city, Dallas, Texas and this is the kind of guy we need more of. He roughed up and shot the pistol in the air because he knew this prisoner had time-sensitive intel about an ambush planned for later that day. He got the intelligence of out the prisoner, sprung the trap on the insurgents, and saved god knows how many of his own men's lives. This is the self-sacrificial act of a man who cares more for his soldiers' lives than his freedom, I think he is a hero and the type of guy I would want to serve under..
 
Yeah I know. The second bit I was thinking of, "this is the definintion of bullsh1t" but I thought we had enough overly emotional threads already... like kinda where this one's headed to.
It is ridiculous. He fired into the air. AWAY from the guy.
 
Not like Arabs don't fire into the air at the drop of a hat anyway.

"It's your birthday Abdul?" BbbbbbrrrrraaaaAAAPPPP!!!!! :m16shoot:
 
Charge_7 said:
Not like Arabs don't fire into the air at the drop of a hat anyway.

"It's your birthday Abdul?" BbbbbbrrrrraaaaAAAPPPP!!!!! :m16shoot:
Click to expand...

i dont see any funny thing with that, well better then to get drunk
 
03USMC said:
I don't think anyone is refering to a scenerio like the Japanese in China, or Nazi Germany running amuck in Europe. We were talking in terms of Somilia, Haiti, Kosovo etc. Peace Keeping and stablization operations. Not all out Aggression. There is difference.

But spin it how you want.
Click to expand...

i wasn't trying to spin it. the last time the US retreated to isolationism...it ended at pearl harbour.
 
It's a good point. But you could argue that an act of non-isolationism, cutting off Japan's access to its oil supply, triggered it.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
It's a good point. But you could argue that an act of non-isolationism, cutting off Japan's access to its oil supply, triggered it.
Click to expand...

very true, but could the US have stopped japan's conquest earlier? for all my critisisms i would'nt like to see the US retreat from the world...just be a lot more careful with the might it does wield.


Whispering Death said:
First off, Americans pay for for I think it is 1/4 of all the UN budget and what do we get for it? Stabbed in the back at every turn. I support wholeheartedly stepping out of the UN or at least cutting our finances like in half.
Click to expand...

actually, the US hasn't paid their full membership fees for years;
http://www.tgmag.ca/ungass/nycbin2.html

The United Nations is sort of like being part of a club that you have to pay money to belong to. Each country that is a member of this club pays membership fees to help the organization run. Countries that make more money, pay higher fees.

According to the United Nations, the U.S. government owes 1.2 billion dollars. Only five percent of this amount is actually owed to the United Nations. The rest is owed to countries ,like Canada and France as contributions for their peacekeeping missions. Essentially, as a member of the UN club, the United States is late on paying their fees. Does this mean they no longer belong?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/jan-june98/dues_3-11.html

"U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan has urged the U.S. to repay billions of dollars in unpaid dues. But many Congressional Republicans continue to greet the subject with skepticism, questioning the role of the international organization. Should the U.S. pay its dues?"
 
Ha ha ha that's awsome Republicans +1 in my book.

Kofi Annan - "Hey, you said you'd pay us 1.2 billion dollars"
Bush - "I say a lot of things"

:rambo:
 
chewie_nz said:
i wasn't trying to spin it. the last time the US retreated to isolationism...it ended at pearl harbour.
Click to expand...

My prediction is that the U.S. isn't going to be isolationist. They're still going to be interested in the middle east, Korea, and Taiwan... But as for the rest of the world? I think you're going to get a bag of rice, a few evangellical missionaries and a dismissive wave.
 
Isolationism is just no longer feasable.
Just not the way the world works now.
Though it'd be interesting to see what would happen if the US did go isolationist, you're right, it's not going to happen.
 
Hi

actually, the US hasn't paid their full membership fees for years;
http://www.tgmag.ca/ungass/nycbin2.html
Click to expand...

Apart form that ....................I don't think if US pulls out all it's Solders Contribution for Peacekeeping Missions ............they would be missed Much as Most of Troops Contribution Comes form Developing Nations............as US only Account for less than 1% of that ................the Current Contribution i think is 40 Solders

Despite the large number of contributors, the greatest burden continues to be borne by a core group of developing countries. The 10 main troop-contributing countries to UN peacekeeping operations as of June 2004 were Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Ghana, India, Ethiopia, South Africa, Uruguay, Jordan and Kenya. About 10 per cent of the troops and civilian police deployed in UN peacekeeping missions come from the European Union and one per cent from the United States.

The largest contributers were from Pakistan (8,652), Bangladesh (8,211) and Nigeria (3,577). The biggest contributer from a western country is Poland with 739 peacekeepers on a 19th place. The USA ranks 26th with 430 peacekeepers. The EU combined have 4,532 peacekeepers.
Click to expand...

Source

Peace
-=SF_13=-
 
We actually meant beyond just peacekeeping missions.
When Americans go in, they usually do it without wearing blue helmets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top