Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-27-2011, 03:22 PM - 1 Like   #31
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,188
QuoteOriginally posted by MRRiley Quote
Actually I would move the UN to the Azores, say just give them the whole island of Terceira. I'm sure Potugal would love the money and it'd get them into an enviorment, where the delagates cannot abuse their diplomatic immunity. It'd also keep the U.S. from having to host psychopaths like Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chavez. As for getting us out. I wouldn't go that far but it is tempting...



As for why we have not paid our dues. Could it be because the host country probably shouldn't have to pay dues. Afterall, we put up with the hassles and expenses incured by all of the delages and we have to suffer enemies like Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chaves on our soil. We also foot a lot of the bill for peacekeeping activities in both treasure and lives.

Mike

Peacekeeping as fighting wars or UN peacekeeping? Canada used to do a lot of that but not much anymore and not sure how much the US has ever done on UN missions. There is always the point made that the US fights battles for the rest of the world, even ones the rest of us do not think should even be battles. But for peacekeeping for the UN the world depends on the rich countries like Bangledish to do it. Check out those involved and it is a bit surprising besides which power houses generally make poor peacekeepers.

As far as the headquarters it was the US that offered it to the UN and as such I find it hard to fathom why you should complain about member countries sending their leaders to a group that is of every nation on earth if they so wish it to be. It was never intented to be a single world government (nor tries to be) and certainly never intended to be the Nations that Americans like or find useful as allies, it is every nation. Hard to solve problems and avoid conflicts if some of the parties can not be present and the conflicts that are prevented are never news stories.

I could not care less if the UN moved to Europe or Montreal or Australia, for all nations except perhaps those with enormous militairs benefit from having it. Perhaps if the US would cut its own military and rely more on coalitions there would be more understanding plus less cost to you. I found it offensive when Americans complained about the Libya sitution in which they were not the lead role, that a foreigner (Canadian) was in charge. That is one of the reasons that the US has not been much in UN missions, the insistence that an American must always be in charge. A reminder that it is not your world, you are only a major and important part of it, not in charge of it and Iran or Cuba has as much right to have whatever leader they do have then did the Chile under Pinochet or Argentina under the Generals or the central American counties with the terrible right wing governments (not to be confused with those that had terrible left wing governments that the US opposed).

The UN is one of the only places that all countries can exchange messages with each other and if you do not like some of those messages just remember that those people are also hearing your messages, it is a two way street and unless or until the rest of the world looses their sovertity (no spell checker on this computer I guess) there will be leaders the US might like and others they might not but they do represent that country and it should never be the US's place to decide who gets to run which country, something that I believe is agreed upon my people on both sides of your political spectrum. But just because the UN is not an arm of the US does not mean it is not useful or not necessary and without the powerhouse countries or the rogue nations for that matter, at the UN I strongly believe the world would be not only a more dangerous place but you would be spending more military dollars as well

09-27-2011, 09:11 PM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Canberra
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 739
QuoteOriginally posted by MRRiley Quote
Why should we pay for activities and functions which go directly against our national interests? Thats like giving a mugger a tip because he didn't shoot or stab you.
Its called Diplomacy.

Not the US definition, Which I believe is "Do it our way or else", but you know, the actual International version which means "Negotiation"... which infers "Compromise" by both parties...
QuoteQuote:
di·plo·ma·cy
1: the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2: skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility
It might be worth noting the second entry of the definition there - "Skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility"....

"Do it the way we want or we aren't playing" isn't Diplomacy - well - in the rest of the world anyway..... And Negotiations fundamentally require compromise - not one side thumping its chest...

Maybe stumbling on this part of the definition, and the sort of general attitude towards Diplomacy thats shown in here and other threads is why despite the economic power the US has/once had, its in fact seen as an Adversary in many many circles... ? The key being - In International Relations there is no "Number 1" - there just is "Everyone".. that would appear to be another stumbling block.... You can't even dream of having a truly equal (and peaceful) world when certain people sitting at the table have a slight superiority complex.... Or at the very least - Recognising that the rest of the world has a "First Amendment Right" just as much as the US ? Perhaps this is the down side to indoctrination from birth that "We're Number One!" (which I admit has a much better ring to it than "We're all Equal!" - but still?)

(Edit: Interesting and poignant - The Wikipedia Page for "Diplomacy" has... a Picture of the UN Headquarters at the very top!! )

Last edited by adr1an; 09-27-2011 at 11:52 PM.
09-27-2011, 10:08 PM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
shooz's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
We haven't been #1 in a lot things we hold dear for a long time now.
Freedom of the press? We're way down the list, and we arguably invented the concept.
Lowest poverty rate? Not so good and getting worse by the minute. Some call it a lifestyle choice. Sick.
Health care? See the many threads on the subject. however, we are definitely NOT #1.


Military spending and marketing penetration (read propaganda). That's our current claim to #1.
Sad.
Plus, lots and lots of prisoners. Highest per capita in western civilization. Hardly anything to brag about.

Most I talk to remain in denial of these facts, or think they don't matter.

They do. Very much, and that's hardly all of them. Others have been posted here.

Not so surprising that so many refuse to understand the efficacy of diplomacy.

We are now #1 in crashing the world economy. Wallstreet did it.
Many remain in denial of that too.

How can we believe we can heal other nations, when we can't see our way clear to heal our own?

Last edited by shooz; 09-27-2011 at 10:30 PM.
09-28-2011, 07:26 AM   #34
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,876
QuoteOriginally posted by adr1an Quote
Its called Diplomacy.
QuoteOriginally posted by adr1an Quote
Quote:
di·plo·ma·cy
1: the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2: skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility
There are a couple of other definitions:
3. Arguing in such a way that you can win without the other party feeling like he lost.
The one we should be utilizing more often is:
4. The art of telling someone to bugger-off without them being offended.

09-28-2011, 03:26 PM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
shooz's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,491
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
4. The art of telling someone to bugger-off without them being offended.
Yes, the teabagger definition, only they offend all other definitions of the word.

Only problem is, telling someone to bugger off by any means also halts all diplomacy.
Making that definition a fail.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bank, check, deposit, fee, hr, increase, obama, paycheck, tax, transactions
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thematic Wetness...If the Subject is Water stevebrot Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 1247 1 Day Ago 09:12 AM
People Easy subject memphis mike Post Your Photos! 3 07-18-2010 03:12 AM
52-2-49 Subject: Water mithrandir Weekly Photo Challenges 20 06-21-2010 04:53 PM
Is there a subject that you just can't get enough of? jct us101 Photographic Technique 43 04-20-2010 12:55 AM
Project 52-2-36 Subject: Abstract mithrandir Weekly Photo Challenges 28 03-21-2010 04:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:03 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top