Clinton-- U.N. secretary general?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
:laugh:

Well at least he would have more credibility than the organization itself, and he wouldn't go for the Israel bashing. I would approve.
 
Clinton has a great world view and understanding. He'd do a very good job, but I think the UN is kinda beyond repair and relevance...
 
True, and UN standards are quite high. Kofi Annan has been working inside the UN for decades before getting into that position. Apparently Clinton hasn´t done that.
 
The UN is the greatest organization of its type ever.a den of corruption and murderous dictators who use "international law" to excuse their massacres - truly it is wonderful.
 
I tend to disagree with "ever". It is a great organization, but things can always be improved.

The UN isn´t perfect, because decisions, actions and political will depend on its member states. It´s not that easy to have every nation on this planet sitting at a round table and talking in a civilized manner.

Kofi Annan, however, has succesfully introduced some important reforms within the UN.
 
A_Wanderer said:
:laugh:

Well at least he would have more credibility than the organization itself, and he wouldn't go for the Israel bashing. I would approve.

wanderer the fact is nobody is bashing israel...i mean who would want to get on the wrong side of america's one and only true ally ...nope dosent matter how many palestenian homes they demolish...dosent matter how much palestenian land they take up illegaly..never in this world noone shud ever bash israel nope never..:shrug:
and btw ...kofi annan cannot be criticized and i do agree that the UN has lost control..as if it ever had any!! the world's matters will still be dictated by military power dosent matter who becomes the next secretary general...and iraq is probably the best(or worse) example
 
All those Palestinian homes are rebuilt by the UN using UN funds, the UNWRA allows UN ambulances to be used by terrorists (not the recent case, but the prior ones where the Reuters crew filmed balaclava clad kalashnikov wielding men using an ambulance to shoot from during an action in gaza), then you have Hansen having no problem employing Hamas members and using them, the fact that half of the emergency meetings of the security council are called whenever Israel makes a move in self defence, the disproportionate condemnation that Israel recieves over its actions, the one nation in the Middle East that actually takes care for human rights is the only one that ever gets attacked for its record, the Palestinians being given special representation at the UN as a reward for terrorism - you do not see a Kurdistan representative or a Tibetan one, the UN consistently validating Palestinian terror by not condemning it outright - rather using a terror attack as a way to blame Israel for inciting it.

The PLO Arabs are leftover from mandate times who decided to listen to Nassr and his promises of driving the Jews into the sea. They have used terrorism as their diplomacy for decades as it has worked - the path of their nationhood is paid with innocent blood.

The UN has a consistent record of ambivalence towards Israel at best and outright loathing at worst. The organization betrays its noble foundation and is dedicated to upholding the rights of dictators and the status quo. As I said the UN is the best organization of its kind ever - an arena for third world dictators to hit above there belt.
 
Last edited:
verte76 said:
I don't think this would substantially change the U.N. or what it does.


Perhaps not but I think A_wanderer has a point--the UN has lost some credibility over the last years and the Oil for Food thing isn't helping either. I think Clinton could restore that in the eyes of the world.
 
Back
Top Bottom