Political Crossfire Forums

[Alexander The Great]

The UN is sold organization, and I would say the world won't suffer from the collapse of this " union " that does absoloutly nothing.

Why does it do nothing about Sudan while it yells about Israel and the US?

Why don't they do anything about the Iranian bomb?

Because their decisions comes out of money.
Owner of the million is the owner of the opinion.

The Arabs have money, and the Arabs are anti Israeli and anti American, so the UN, that's controlled by money goes against Israel and the US.
And Sudan, that's a Muslim state, and does a Genociode, the UN don't do anything, and I'd say that's Genocide is more crucial than what's happenning in Iraq and Israel, the same about Amnesty.

[Eton]

Once again...... :roll:

How can the UN do anything when it is an inter-governmental institution, the real culprits are on the security council, as soon as something crops up they don't like they veto it. The UN has no indeopendent power, it can only urge people to do things.

Rather than scrap it, why not give it some teeth?

[Snow Patrol]

It doesn't do exactly what Israel and America wants, they have a victim complex about it.

You object to it on not wanting to be part of it out of isolationist beliefs or you don't want to pay your taxes to it, thats fine, i don't agree with it but i respect it. But to say it's some anti-American anti-Israeli pro-Islamist conspiracy is right up there with all that crap right-wingers accuse liberals of making up.

[Alexander The Great]

Snow Patrol wrote: It doesn't do exactly what Israel and America wants, they have a victim complex about it.

You object to it on not wanting to be part of it out of isolationist beliefs or you don't want to pay your taxes to it, thats fine, i don't agree with it but i respect it. But to say it's some anti-American anti-Israeli pro-Islamist conspiracy is right up there with all that crap right-wingers accuse liberals of making up.


I'm saying the UN is controlled by money, and today those who have it are countries as Saudi Arabia, from their oil.

[Snow Patrol]

No, the US pays the most contributions wise in terms of amount. Theres no Arab country on the security council.

[Alexander The Great]

Snow Patrol wrote: No, the US pays the most contributions wise in terms of amount. Theres no Arab country on the security council.

Ahmm, ahmm, Syria, ahmm...

[Snow Patrol]

The Council has 15 members-- five permanent members and 10 elected
by the General Assembly for two-year terms:

Members elected to the council in 2005:

Argentina, Benin, Brazil, Denmark, Greece, Japan, Philippines, Romania, Tanzania, Algeria

Permanent Members:

China, France, Russian Federation, Britain, America

Source:
http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_members.html

So lets see thats 2 predominantly muslim countries who are elected members i.e. only on teh council for two years: Philippines and Algeria, neither of which is in the middle-east and neither is permenant members so has no veto power.

As for Syria:

Syrian contribution to UN in 2004-05 = $324,000
Source: http://ocha.unog.ch/fts/reporting/reporting_display.asp?short=1&filterLabel=Donor------Syrian%20Arab%20Republic&whereClause=%20WHERE%20(DonorRepresentedCountryID=%20'206'%20)

US contribution to UN in 2004-05 = $2.2 billion
Source:
http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKRI8MPJpF&b=328791

So...yeah, the Arabs really control the UN.

[Alexander The Great]

Snow Patrol wrote: The Council has 15 members-- five permanent members and 10 elected
by the General Assembly for two-year terms:

Members elected to the council in 2005:

Argentina, Benin, Brazil, Denmark, Greece, Japan, Philippines, Romania, Tanzania, Algeria

Permanent Members:

China, France, Russian Federation, Britain, America

Source:
http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_members.html

So lets see thats 2 predominantly muslim countries who are elected members i.e. only on teh council for two years: Philippines and Algeria, neither of which is in the middle-east and neither is permenant members so has no veto power.

As for Syria:

Syrian contribution to UN in 2004-05 = $324,000
Source: http://ocha.unog.ch/fts/reporting/reporting_display.asp?short=1&filterLabel=Donor------Syrian%20Arab%20Republic&whereClause=%20WHERE%20(DonorRepresentedCountryID=%20'206'%20)

US contribution to UN in 2004-05 = $2.2 billion
Source:
http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKRI8MPJpF&b=328791

So...yeah, the Arabs really control the UN.

They got influence, Syria not, But I would point Saudi Arabia.

[Snow Patrol]

If Syria doesn't have much influenece then why bring it up?

The middle-east has some world influence because it controls a large part of the oil industry i.e. a valuable commodtity every other country in the world needs and is to a certain extent dependent on. Howver i fail to see what this has to so with the UN, the influence through oil prices is over individual countries, not the UN as a whole.

Your other example was Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia: Contributions to UN in 2004-05: $227,127,432
Source:
http://ocha.unog.ch/fts/reporting/reporting_display.asp?short=1&filterLabel=Donor------Saudi%20Arabia&whereClause=%20WHERE%20(DonorRepresentedCountryID=%20'185'%20)

Britain: Contributions to UN in 2004-05: $585,246,982
Source:
http://ocha.unog.ch/fts/reporting/reporting_display.asp?short=1&filterLabel=Donor------United%20Kingdom&whereClause=%20WHERE%20(DonorRepresentedCountryID=%20'223'%20)

So that's one of the worlds leading oil producing nations, one of the biggest and most powerful Arab countries. Not even on the security council as an elected member, pays less than half of contributions that Britain does.

What is this Arab control of the UN your talking about?

[uzi]

Probably because Syria was on the Security Council a short while ago.

As for Arab influence, it's not just Syria and Saudi Arabia, it's the combined influence of many Arab and Muslim nations working together with dictatorships and all sorts of Anti-American, and Anti-Israel types to try and use the U.N as a platform to attack us and our interests.

I'm not saying we should do away with the U.N I'm just saying it's corrupt and there are undemocratic countries in it who are only making obstacles for peace and stability. The U.S takes a lot of s**t from countries ruled by genocidal dictators and that suits many countries that want to see a weaker U.S. Plus like every organization, it needs serious reforms from time to time or it is no longer effective.

[Alexander The Great]

uzi4ufriend wrote: Probably because Syria was on the Security Council a short while ago.

As for Arab influence, it's not just Syria and Saudi Arabia, it's the combined influence of many Arab and Muslim nations working together with dictatorships and all sorts of Anti-American, and Anti-Israel types to try and use the U.N as a platform to attack us and our interests.

I'm not saying we should do away with the U.N I'm just saying it's corrupt and there are undemocratic countries in it who are only making obstacles for peace and stability. The U.S takes a lot of s**t from countries ruled by genocidal dictators and that suits many countries that want to see a weaker U.S. Plus like every organization, it needs serious reforms from time to time or it is no longer effective.

Well, that's why the UN is sold, but if I'd have been saying this, all Yefey Hanefesh were automatically yelling " racist ".

[Snow Patrol]

Alexander The Great wrote: uzi4ufriend wrote: Probably because Syria was on the Security Council a short while ago.

As for Arab influence, it's not just Syria and Saudi Arabia, it's the combined influence of many Arab and Muslim nations working together with dictatorships and all sorts of Anti-American, and Anti-Israel types to try and use the U.N as a platform to attack us and our interests.

I'm not saying we should do away with the U.N I'm just saying it's corrupt and there are undemocratic countries in it who are only making obstacles for peace and stability. The U.S takes a lot of s**t from countries ruled by genocidal dictators and that suits many countries that want to see a weaker U.S. Plus like every organization, it needs serious reforms from time to time or it is no longer effective.

Well, that's why the UN is sold, but if I'd have been saying this, all Yefey Hanefesh were automatically yelling " racist ".
No you didn't really say that, you said the UN was sold because Arabs had money and that this is why they had influenece over the UN. Who started yelling racist?

[Alexander The Great]

Snow Patrol wrote: Alexander The Great wrote: uzi4ufriend wrote: Probably because Syria was on the Security Council a short while ago.

As for Arab influence, it's not just Syria and Saudi Arabia, it's the combined influence of many Arab and Muslim nations working together with dictatorships and all sorts of Anti-American, and Anti-Israel types to try and use the U.N as a platform to attack us and our interests.

I'm not saying we should do away with the U.N I'm just saying it's corrupt and there are undemocratic countries in it who are only making obstacles for peace and stability. The U.S takes a lot of s**t from countries ruled by genocidal dictators and that suits many countries that want to see a weaker U.S. Plus like every organization, it needs serious reforms from time to time or it is no longer effective.

Well, that's why the UN is sold, but if I'd have been saying this, all Yefey Hanefesh were automatically yelling " racist ".
No you didn't really say that, you said the UN was sold because Arabs had money and that this is why they had influenece over the UN. Who started yelling racist?

I decided not to take the chance, because I've said such things, and the 1st word was racist.
Not here, but I decided not to take the chance.

[uzi]

Also it should be noted that Arab countries were also behind the ridiculous comparison of Zionism and racism which was accepted by the UN for a while and reiterated in several international forums (Not INTERNET forums!!! The kind where ambassadors and other dignitaries meet) related to the UN.

In case there are people here who support this comparison, I would just like to note that there has not been a similar comparison of other national movements which wanted self determination for a certain ethnic group. The Checks can have a country, but the Jews can't. The French can have a country, but the Jews can't. The Chinese can have a country, but the Jews can't. Saudis can have a country, but Jews can't. The Vatican is an independent state, but the Jews wanting to have one state where they aren't the minority is wrong and it's...racist???

Not to mention that Israel has a million Arab citizens, both Muslim and Christian. We have Druz, Beduin, Bahai and anything else that exists under the sun, so it is funny when people say the Zionist state is racist.
While Palestinians demand that ALL JEWS leave their future state!!!
But that's o.k right?
In Israel everyone is welcome to stay, but we just believe we have a right to live in a Jewish state just like any group has the right to self determination.

What happens to people who don't follow Islamic law in Saudi Arabia?
I'd like to see any of the women here go to Saudi Arabia and wear a skirt or something. Or how about just removing their veil?
How about in Iran? Do foreigners have to adhere to Islamic laws over there? And are there any women politicians over there?

Israel gives freedom of religion to everyone and provides free access to all the holy places for all religions. The same cannot be said about the periods when Jerusalem was ruled by others.

[Chris29]

Alexander The Great wrote: The UN is sold organization, and I would say the world won't suffer from the collapse of this " union " that does absoloutly nothing.


Allright Alexander lets get real here. Statements such as "the UN is a sold organization" and "that does absolutely nothing" are pretty damn extreme. Obviously its no surprise where I stand on the issue and I will have my own bias but such statements are so far beyond extreme that they really do not allow for any sort of debate. I have shown countless times before the amazing work that the UN has done not just by presenting simple stats and facts but also showing so through my work with them.


Quote: Why does it do nothing about Sudan while it yells about Israel and the US?

The UN are the only ones doing anything about the Sudan, yes there needs to be more done but without the political will from the membership there is nothing you can do. Luckily you and I agree on the issue of Sudan and the need for urgent action immediately but what is Israel doing, what about the US or my own country of Canada. Lets face it when it comes to impoverished Africans there really isn't a strong voice for action from individual countries. The Sudan crisis only demonstrates the need for the UN.

Also you repeatedly say both in this topic and many others that the UN is yelling about Israel and the US but could you please show us some evidence for this. So far I have never seen anything that demonstrates any anti-american or anti-israeli bias in the UN.


Quote: Why don't they do anything about the Iranian bomb?

Again the same situation with the Sudan, the fact is that no one really seems to care except maybe Israel. The IAEA are doing everything they legally can right now but without action from the member states nothing will work.


Quote: Because their decisions comes out of money.
Owner of the million is the owner of the opinion.

The UN as it is structured actually prevents this. The General Assembly after all has the one country - one vote principle which would thus prevent the wealthier nations from securing total power, although albeit they still hold the political power one way or another. However the one institution where the wealthier nations do hold more power is with the IMF in which votes are determined based on country wealth.



Quote: The Arabs have money, and the Arabs are anti Israeli and anti American, so the UN, that's controlled by money goes against Israel and the US.
And Sudan, that's a Muslim state, and does a Genociode, the UN don't do anything, and I'd say that's Genocide is more crucial than what's happenning in Iraq and Israel, the same about Amnesty.

Well Alexander I hope you don't mean this to be racist in any way although you really need to learn to stop being so obviously opposed to this group. The first things is that not all Arabs are anti-Israeli and certainly not all arabs are anti-american.

More importantly however is that this statement is completely wrong. After all nearly 2/3rds of the UN budget is paid by 3 non Arab countries (the US, Germany and Japan). Arab countries are quite low on the wealth scale globally despite having lots of oil. Egypt is the richest Arab country and it is 28th in GDP.

[Chris29]

Eton wrote: Rather than scrap it, why not give it some teeth?

:clap: :clap: :clap: well said

[Chris29]

uzi4ufriend wrote: Probably because Syria was on the Security Council a short while ago.

That is true but I am sure the G.A. will not elect them again especially after the Human Rights Commission fiasco. Thank God!


Quote: As for Arab influence, it's not just Syria and Saudi Arabia, it's the combined influence of many Arab and Muslim nations working together with dictatorships and all sorts of Anti-American, and Anti-Israel types to try and use the U.N as a platform to attack us and our interests.

Well I am not going to deny this but after all that is their right to do so if they choose is it not? I agree there actions are wrong but is it really any different then a national politician attacking another politicians policies?? Besides these countries do not have the numbers nor political influence to make any real impact over the votes. The fact is that the majority of the world is not anti-Israeli or anti-American and thus there is nothing we really need to worry about.


Quote: I'm not saying we should do away with the U.N I'm just saying it's corrupt and there are undemocratic countries in it who are only making obstacles for peace and stability.

Well I wouldn't say that the UN is corrupt although there are certainly individuals who have given it a stained name. But there certainly are undemocratic countries in the world and thus in the UN who cause problems. Our role is to use the UN as well as other institutions and other means to work towards creating a more democratic world.


Quote: The U.S takes a lot of s**t from countries ruled by genocidal dictators and that suits many countries that want to see a weaker U.S.

let them criticize the US it only brings a further lack of credibility towards their causes when they criticize the US while killing their own citizens. Besides as I have said these countries really play little to no role in the UN.


Quote: Plus like every organization, it needs serious reforms from time to time or it is no longer effective.

could not agree more. The only question is what reforms need to take place?

[Alexander The Great]

Chris29 wrote: Alexander The Great wrote: The UN is sold organization, and I would say the world won't suffer from the collapse of this " union " that does absoloutly nothing.


Allright Alexander lets get real here. Statements such as "the UN is a sold organization" and "that does absolutely nothing" are pretty damn extreme. Obviously its no surprise where I stand on the issue and I will have my own bias but such statements are so far beyond extreme that they really do not allow for any sort of debate. I have shown countless times before the amazing work that the UN has done not just by presenting simple stats and facts but also showing so through my work with them.


Quote: Why does it do nothing about Sudan while it yells about Israel and the US?

The UN are the only ones doing anything about the Sudan, yes there needs to be more done but without the political will from the membership there is nothing you can do. Luckily you and I agree on the issue of Sudan and the need for urgent action immediately but what is Israel doing, what about the US or my own country of Canada. Lets face it when it comes to impoverished Africans there really isn't a strong voice for action from individual countries. The Sudan crisis only demonstrates the need for the UN.

Also you repeatedly say both in this topic and many others that the UN is yelling about Israel and the US but could you please show us some evidence for this. So far I have never seen anything that demonstrates any anti-american or anti-israeli bias in the UN.


Quote: Why don't they do anything about the Iranian bomb?

Again the same situation with the Sudan, the fact is that no one really seems to care except maybe Israel. The IAEA are doing everything they legally can right now but without action from the member states nothing will work.


Quote: Because their decisions comes out of money.
Owner of the million is the owner of the opinion.

The UN as it is structured actually prevents this. The General Assembly after all has the one country - one vote principle which would thus prevent the wealthier nations from securing total power, although albeit they still hold the political power one way or another. However the one institution where the wealthier nations do hold more power is with the IMF in which votes are determined based on country wealth.



Quote: The Arabs have money, and the Arabs are anti Israeli and anti American, so the UN, that's controlled by money goes against Israel and the US.
And Sudan, that's a Muslim state, and does a Genociode, the UN don't do anything, and I'd say that's Genocide is more crucial than what's happenning in Iraq and Israel, the same about Amnesty.

Well Alexander I hope you don't mean this to be racist in any way although you really need to learn to stop being so obviously opposed to this group. The first things is that not all Arabs are anti-Israeli and certainly not all arabs are anti-american.

More importantly however is that this statement is completely wrong. After all nearly 2/3rds of the UN budget is paid by 3 non Arab countries (the US, Germany and Japan). Arab countries are quite low on the wealth scale globally despite having lots of oil. Egypt is the richest Arab country and it is 28th in GDP.

No, the reason that yhe IAEA does nothing is because the head of it is Muslim.
And, Sudan is not enough, and who've done orderf in Yugoslavia?
The UN?
No, Nato.

[Alexander The Great]

Chris29 wrote: uzi4ufriend wrote: Probably because Syria was on the Security Council a short while ago.

That is true but I am sure the G.A. will not elect them again especially after the Human Rights Commission fiasco. Thank God!


Quote: As for Arab influence, it's not just Syria and Saudi Arabia, it's the combined influence of many Arab and Muslim nations working together with dictatorships and all sorts of Anti-American, and Anti-Israel types to try and use the U.N as a platform to attack us and our interests.

Well I am not going to deny this but after all that is their right to do so if they choose is it not? I agree there actions are wrong but is it really any different then a national politician attacking another politicians policies?? Besides these countries do not have the numbers nor political influence to make any real impact over the votes. The fact is that the majority of the world is not anti-Israeli or anti-American and thus there is nothing we really need to worry about.


Quote: I'm not saying we should do away with the U.N I'm just saying it's corrupt and there are undemocratic countries in it who are only making obstacles for peace and stability.

Well I wouldn't say that the UN is corrupt although there are certainly individuals who have given it a stained name. But there certainly are undemocratic countries in the world and thus in the UN who cause problems. Our role is to use the UN as well as other institutions and other means to work towards creating a more democratic world.


Quote: The U.S takes a lot of s**t from countries ruled by genocidal dictators and that suits many countries that want to see a weaker U.S.

let them criticize the US it only brings a further lack of credibility towards their causes when they criticize the US while killing their own citizens. Besides as I have said these countries really play little to no role in the UN.


Quote: Plus like every organization, it needs serious reforms from time to time or it is no longer effective.

could not agree more. The only question is what reforms need to take place?

So, answer this question, if the UN isn't Anti Israeli, why there was a decision the Zionism is Racism?

[Nico]

Alexander The Great wrote:

So, answer this question, if the UN isn't Anti Israeli, why there was a decision the Zionism is Racism?

To take the UN perspective, you would have to start by defining Zionism. There may be many ways it is presented by different interests, but the UN will have a strict definition of the meaning from their point of view. They would base any ruling on that definition, for better or worse. If you look at what the definition is according to them, that may be not how you for one may see it.

You would begin by challenging the definition, if you wanted to challenge the ruling.


http://www.bjetoronto.org/link.onlinesession.zionism.html