UN Embassy Bombing and State of UN...

[Kent]

On the subject of the Iraqi UN embassy bombing and The State of the UN in general...

I have just now seen Kofi Annan, say that this bombing is a result of the US not properly taking care of security in Iraq.

Yet, note the facts...

The UN declined the offer from the pentagon to appropriate American troops for the security of the UN compound.

-I believe in personal accountability and those ethics lead me to believe that: should the UN decline outside assistance with security, the UN should be held accountable for the security of the establishment/compound. (humanitarian aid facility in this case)

This sort of situation puts me in the position to support a complete withdraw from the UN, while supporting a new selective, "nato-ish" organization based on humanitarian aid.

The UN has become a bureaucracy over the last 50 years. (flat out)

I would say the Korean War represents the end of an honest "humanitarian" organization and the beginning of an "emergency recovery group."

One era represents the ideals of fighting for human rights against, literally! a criminal land grab, invasion of South Korea, by North Korean communist supported by China red him self. (lol, sorry bout the short names.)

The other era only represents and International Organization that reacts to famine and genocide after the formal acknowledgment of such crimes or conditions.

After the Korean War, an evenly balanced (if you could call it that) UN, military commitment towards the prevention of aggressive military campaigns was not recreated until 1991, during the first gulf war. (Which was initially an action to only contain Saddam himself.)

Now... well the UN is just what we know... (I will let you decide the description there; ours my vary so I will spare you mine.)

What do you think?

Is Kofi Annan not fulfilling his obligations as a leader for the UN when he attempts to establish authority and a special envoy in Iraq?

By the results Annan has produced, I say no.

Military assistance from the UN was not offered during the removal of Saddam. (As the UN believed terrorist and the reasoning for war was not enough at that point) Then the UN declined security assistance after the conflict had subsided.

These are two examples of mismanagement directly from the top levels of the UN.

...

Please discuss if you wish, I might come back, but you never know... I don?t subscribe to threads.
(and try to remember what this thread is about? stay on topic! )
I also wish to openly acknowledge a sorrow and respect for the victims of this murderous crime. Several were killed and many more injured.
*There was also a hamas bombing in Jerusalem the same day of the UN bombing. (You decide if it?s a coincidence.)

[Harry]

The UN Security council is turning more and more into a worthless organization. The vetos make it equally worthless and less democratic than ever.

[Orien_Xel]

Although the UN is becoming very bearucratic, and needlessly tangled, its the best thing we have so far for a world gov't.

And yes, the two bombings were a coincidence. Tha's like saying "Well, this guy was murdered in this city, and another guy was murdered in another city. Must be the same group/guy"

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Orien_Xel [/i]
[B]Although the UN is becoming very bearucratic, and needlessly tangled, its the best thing we have so far for a world gov't. [/B][/QUOTE]
And what's so good about a world gov?

[Justin]

A world government would not be a good thing, in my opinion.

However, when two major bombings happen, I wouldn't use the analogy you did, Orien. I don't think it's unreasonable to investigate them as though they were possibly done by the same group.

-Justin

[Semjaza]

If you define world government as a group that passes out care packages, maybe. I have no real love for the UN at this point in time.

[Kent]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Orien_Xel [/i]
[B]Although the UN is becoming very bearucratic, and needlessly tangled, its the best thing we have so far for a world gov't.

And yes, the two bombings were a coincidence. Tha's like saying "Well, this guy was murdered in this city, and another guy was murdered in another city. Must be the same group/guy" [/B][/QUOTE]

Ok, first off, everyone, no more world gov talk. Just keep it together. I hate closures.

Now for the qoute above...

Basically, I disagree.

I see a period of under 24 hours where 2 major bombings occur in the "same area" of the world.

Think about this, hamas in Jerusalem and ansar al islam in Iraq.

Ever since the "World Islamic Front Against Jews and Crusaders" was established, the ranks of all militant muslims have worked for the same goal. (most of us understand that goal after 9/11)

With one group showing its will to fight, another group siezed the day and took a stand as well.

These people dont need to worry about formal relations. Each individual group of terrorist knows that even if they never heard of another "cell," they would still be waging jihad.

We, as civil people, need to recognize the end goal of groups like al-queda and ansar al islam. Ignoring an international front against any establishment that does not live by extremist Islam is not a wise choice for anyone to make.

There is a deep relationship between the terrorist throughout all of the Mid East. No relationships are needed, only a common goal and a common ideology.

Thats just my view though...

(oh yeah, world gov. is a bad idea)

[lea]

yeah, i understand what you mean, gokents. its "the enemy of my enemy is my allie"
but, what might help everyone is if they knew exactly why the terrorist groups are doing what they are doing (why they are doing it is justifiable, the way they are doing it is totally wrong. bombing innocent people, whatever your religion, is flat out wrong.)

[Harry]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by lea2385 [/i]
[B]yeah, i understand what you mean, gokents. its "the enemy of my enemy is my allie"
but, what might help everyone is if they knew exactly why the terrorist groups are doing what they are doing (why they are doing it is justifiable, the way they are doing it is totally wrong. bombing innocent people, whatever your religion, is flat out wrong.) [/B][/QUOTE]
They're doing it because they're fundamentalists, we can try to straighten all of this out after we crush them, but that won't be happening because the world thinks it's hip to let terrorists prance everywhere.

[Guest pantalaimon]

I agree our governments and the un are just too screwed up internely to actually deal with terrorists.

[Kent]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Harry [/i]
[B]They're doing it because they're fundamentalists, we can try to straighten all of this out after we crush them, but that won't be happening because the world thinks it's hip to let terrorists prance everywhere. [/B][/QUOTE]

Hell fuckin yeah my man! :demon:

That is what we need, but not just plain indiscrimnate killing or anything of that sort...

What I think we need is the idea I mentioned earlier...

Recognition of a threat.

Once the world openly recognizes the true nature of these factions, we will be able to take a united stand against them.

Unfortunatly, due to what you mentioned about it "being hip" to not confront these people, we will never see a true defeat for the jihad.

I also wanna mention that the goal and drive of these terrorist is not as hidden or complex as people may believe.

Infact, it is as obvious as the actions taken by the terrorist.

Their stated goal is the destruction of the "western world."

The ideology held sacred to these people is the hope that one day, all individuals will be united by the enlightenment of allah.

Flat out, these people are trying to purify the earth of all non-believers. (Infadels..lol I love that word.)

I also wanna mention that the last post above mine acknowledged the complete mess the UN has become... to that, I say well done.

The UN is garbage, and just like any other pile of garbage, it needs to be taken out and cleaned.

Who is willing to do that...? I dont know, but I can tell you now that America is a nation powerful enough to side step the garbage and deal with the real troubles of the world, without the help of a stinky trash can.