hey you'r not the only one who is ashamed - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-20-2003, 05:29 PM   #16
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Russia
Posts: 210
Local Time: 10:44 AM
Correction to my previous mess: "This is what UN and international law were designed to prevent"
__________________

__________________
ALEXRUS is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 06:25 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep


I don't see where zootvgrrl33gp has replied to you either. She does not have to reply, and I would not blame her. In your response to her post you tried to put words in her mouth.

As for my post I will restate it. It seems you may not have understood what I was trying to state. Only two countries, the US and Israel supported this war without UN approval. I believe the majority of all the other countries do not. Why do you think that is?
I already apologized to zootvgrrl for the misunderstanding.

Anyway, I did understand what you were trying to say, and it was a made up percentage used to scew people's opinion.

You say the majority of other countries don't support the war without U.N. approval, but you are speaking about polling results of the public. My whole point in this is that the public is not well-informed. If you went down the street and asked people what resolution 1440 was, I would bet you 75% of those people would have no clue, and if they even knew it was a UN resolution, even less would know any details of it. I mean Jay Leno goes out and asks people political questions all the time, several can't even name the vice president!!!! Let's face it, the general public is not well informed, they don't do their homework on issues, and they pretty much shout along with what is popular at the moment.

(The above percentages are my opinion and not stated as scientific fact)
__________________

__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 06:29 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ALEXRUS
Correction to my previous mess: "This is what UN and international law were designed to prevent"
I agree with you, but if you look at the UN's track record on dealing with situations such as this, it is horrendous. Even the most liberal, peace pronouncing, war protester will tell you this if they are well informed on the subject.

I wish the U.N. would work, but because countries pulled out of their original agreements that they unanimously passed (1441), Iraq took the upper hand. A united front by the U.N. may have been able to avoid all of this.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 08:36 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 09:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by womanfish

I agree with you, but if you look at the UN's track record on dealing with situations such as this, it is horrendous. Even the most liberal, peace pronouncing, war protester will tell you this if they are well informed on the subject.

I wish the U.N. would work, but because countries pulled out of their original agreements that they unanimously passed (1441), Iraq took the upper hand. A united front by the U.N. may have been able to avoid all of this.
Dear womanfish,

with all respect to your opinion, my opinion is that you are not well informed on the subject of the UN. I won´t talk about war or not war here for now, lets talk just about the United Nations.

If you think you are a little informed, please post the UN Charta here and critisize the articles which have to do with the actual situation. Post the UN resolutions that were made in the process you call "horrendous UN track record", and your interpretation of them. Post what the CTBTO is, what its major tasks are, what the IAEA is, what the IAEA does; post actual statements of the Secretary - General about the war, give a history of Mr. Blix´s statements and tell me why and from which point he was bashed by the US administration. Post why UN officials, - who are very well informed, just take my word on this - think this war is breaking international law. Post about the six main bodies of the United Nations, and do tell how on earth you come to the conclusion that deeps post is about polling results of the public. Tell me about the Security Council, how it is built up, how it works.

If you think you are well informed, please go ahead and pm some scenes behind the curtains to me. I would like to learn from you. And tell me when you have been to the United Nations Headquarters, and what kind of atmosphere you have felt there.

Finally, you can maybe explain about the difference between resolution 1440 and 1441

Regards from the oval office,

whenhiphop
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 10:16 PM   #20
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 02:44 AM
46% of Americans think that most of the 9/11 terrorists were Iraqi. Obviously, not very informed. regardless of our opinions in this forum either way, be aware that we are a small percentage of people who are basing our positions on facts and discussions and the issues and not some propaganda being fed to us by the president or anti-war celebrities.

As for the UN, I wish something could have worked with them but be aware, they are not supposed to be a confrontational organization. There was an AMAZING profile in the New Yorker about Kofi Annan and one of the things he said he was frustrated with is people who expect the UN to fight wars. They can't. All these countries do is look out for themselves -- the US and France included -- and help very little with troops for peacekeeping missions or anything else. They make the resolutions and expect someone else to carry them out. The UN does not have the power to invade a country's sovernignity. They can go in and ask Iraq to disarm but unless the UN's members back up the UN, the organization can't do anything.

Seriously, go to your library and find the Kofi Annan article. Amazing piece of work about what's really happening in the UN with this issue.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 10:31 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars


Dear womanfish,

with all respect to your opinion, my opinion is that you are not well informed on the subject of the UN. I won´t talk about war or not war here for now, lets talk just about the United Nations.

If you think you are a little informed, please post the UN Charta here and critisize the articles which have to do with the actual situation. Post the UN resolutions that were made in the process you call "horrendous UN track record", and your interpretation of them. Post what the CTBTO is, what its major tasks are, what the IAEA is, what the IAEA does; post actual statements of the Secretary - General about the war, give a history of Mr. Blix´s statements and tell me why and from which point he was bashed by the US administration. Post why UN officials, - who are very well informed, just take my word on this - think this war is breaking international law. Post about the six main bodies of the United Nations, and do tell how on earth you come to the conclusion that deeps post is about polling results of the public. Tell me about the Security Council, how it is built up, how it works.

If you think you are well informed, please go ahead and pm some scenes behind the curtains to me. I would like to learn from you. And tell me when you have been to the United Nations Headquarters, and what kind of atmosphere you have felt there.

Finally, you can maybe explain about the difference between resolution 1440 and 1441

Regards from the oval office,

whenhiphop

I see you like to post quizzes, so my reply shall be somewhat the same fashion. I will not even go into your ridiculous test questions on every aspect, every council member and a transcript of every word they have ever spoken. I have never said anything about failures of Hans Blix, and no I don't know Kofi Annan's pant size either. I take note of your smugness. but as a rational, intelligent human being, I only expect people to keep themselves informed with some good general knowledge. I don't act like an ass and ask them what "what kind of atmosphere they feel when visiting the UN headquarters".

That said, it is well known of the failures of the UN, some people even speak out bitterly towards them and say they are the cause of horrible human rights atrocities across the globe. I don't think they are the cause, but in many instances have failed to act when they should have.

Here are some cases that I didn't need to visit the UN headquarters to know about. You can tell me how the UN was a succeeded in these instances if you would like. I consider them failures in my opinion.

Kosovo
Rwanda
Congo in 98
Serbia bombings in 99
Cambodia
Sierre Leone - UN troops pulled out of attack on Kabala leaving thousands dead
East Timor - Thousands killed as UN couldn't agree to send troops, Australian troops finally intervened.
Srebenica - Again UN undecided, they pulled peace keeping troops that were already there and that had brought thousands to a save haven. After being pulled by arguing UN - it left the gathered muslims to be slaughtered. Almost 8000 in all.
And of course Somalia - UN troops killed 250 demonstraters. Then of course the bungled mission which turned into a bloody street battle.

I don't doubt that the UN officials aren't well informed. I never said they weren't. But every country has their own agenda, and the way the security council is set up it just doesn't work well to provide help and stability where it is needed and in a timely manner. Again, my opinion.

And "how on earth do I come to the conclusion that Deeps posts are about polling results of the public" Well because they are smart guy. I quote - "Why do the POPULATIONS of over 90% of all other countries in the world not support this war?" He is saying that a majority of the population in over 90% of the countries in the world are against the war. I would imagine you would need polling results to come up with this conclusion. But that's just common sense, something you seem lack.

And just curious. Why would you want to know the difference between 1440 and 1441? 1440 I believe deals with Chechan rebels in Russia and 1440 is about the disarmament and continued non-disarmament of Iraq.

P.S. - U.N. Ambassador Richardson loves Ham and cheese on rye bread for lunch. I know because I am so behind the scenes.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 10:40 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sharky
46% of Americans think that most of the 9/11 terrorists were Iraqi. Obviously, not very informed. regardless of our opinions in this forum either way, be aware that we are a small percentage of people who are basing our positions on facts and discussions and the issues and not some propaganda being fed to us by the president or anti-war celebrities.

As for the UN, I wish something could have worked with them but be aware, they are not supposed to be a confrontational organization. There was an AMAZING profile in the New Yorker about Kofi Annan and one of the things he said he was frustrated with is people who expect the UN to fight wars. They can't. All these countries do is look out for themselves -- the US and France included -- and help very little with troops for peacekeeping missions or anything else. They make the resolutions and expect someone else to carry them out. The UN does not have the power to invade a country's sovernignity. They can go in and ask Iraq to disarm but unless the UN's members back up the UN, the organization can't do anything.

Seriously, go to your library and find the Kofi Annan article. Amazing piece of work about what's really happening in the UN with this issue.
Sharky, I agree that the UN is looked to, to do too much. And I know that they can't always do everything and solve every problem. I just feel with so many interests involved, and then having the Big 5 be able to veto anything down, makes it hard for them to get anything done that they could reasonably achieve. I will look for this article. it sounds informative.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 10:57 PM   #23
New Yorker
 
sharky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,637
Local Time: 02:44 AM
In the article I mentioned, Annan talked about the slaughter of Kosovo refugees in a UN safe zone. The UN peacekeepers were supposed to protect. But they were VERY VERY VERY restricted in the Kosovo case due to how many UN troops they had.

In the cases you mentioned womanfish, analyze if things could be different in those cases if the UN actually had the support of its members to portect those people. The UN is only as strong as the people who support it. Its nice to see France supports the UN now but where were they with their troops to work under the UN when the UN needed them?

Its like one of the quotes from Bono Bingo. Just like trying to put out the fire engulfing Africa with a watering can, the same can be said with trying to put out conflagrations in the world with the water hose the UN provides. Unfortunately, it could be better if its members supported it.
__________________
sharky is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 11:48 PM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
That's my point. Because of the dozens and dozens of opinions, friendships, bitterness, grudges, favors owed, - I guess what I'm saying is, politics in general. countries are going to sit around and debate and argue, and if they do put a resolution together, some will back it up, it seems like most won't. And then filter all of that down through the 5 members of the security council with veto power and it's made even more difficult.

I don't blame them so much as just doubt what good they are really able to do and if they do decide to put some effort somewhere, can they agree in a timely manner so that it matters?
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 11:54 PM   #25
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
I don't see where anyone called anyone "mindless sheep" in this thread.

You don't? Didn't you read this statement in the very first post of the thread?

"but the ashamed that people in america do not think for themselves, "
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 03-20-2003, 11:56 PM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 02:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by womanfish


I know and I think people have every right to protest. I think that it's a critical part of being an American to disagree with your government. I am saying is that with this conflict, people are jumping on a protest bandwagon and are not sitting down and doing research on what is really going on. They are screaming for "peace" yet 1.2 million people have died under Saddam Hussein's rule because he won't disarm and the U.N. continues sanctions against them. I have never seen "peace" bring so much death.
womanfish, you do realize I'm on your side, don't you?
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 03-21-2003, 12:00 AM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
yeah, I read one of the posts wrong earlier and apologized for it. But I left this statement because I feel it reiterated your point. People are free to protest and give their point of view, I just think people don't know enough about the situation - on both sides of the issue.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-21-2003, 12:03 AM   #28
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 12:44 AM
womanfish, don't kid yourself by thinking you're taking the high road in this debate. You've been consistently condescending and insulting in your posts on this forum.
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 03-21-2003, 01:02 AM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by pub crawler
womanfish, don't kid yourself by thinking you're taking the high road in this debate. You've been consistently condescending and insulting in your posts on this forum.
Thanks for info. Glad to see you're looking down on me from your pedestal.
__________________
womanfish is offline  
Old 03-21-2003, 01:44 AM   #30
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 12:44 AM
More sarcasm. Carry on, womanfish.
__________________

__________________
pub crawler is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com