Thread: Should the US get out of the UN?

No....
Where is this question coming from?

yea what the hell are you thinking??

We should empty all the rats from it and bulldoze it into the ocean. At least as fish structure the UN building would serve some purpose. Its nothing but a whorehouse staffed with pimps,johns, and whores. It makes me sick to think how were funding over 50% of an organization that works against us, against democracy, and gives an official forumn to every tyrant,dictator, military strongman, and President for life in the world.............Rich

Originally Posted by Rich46yo

.....against democracy, and gives an official forumn to every tyrant,dictator, military strongman, and President for life in the world.............Rich

All of which were probably funded and/or armed by the U.S. Government until
they became anti-American. (Noriega in Panama, Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war, Afghanistan to repel the Soviet invasion)

I've never heard of democracy being established by pointing a weapon in someone's rib...

I find it ironic that when AMERICANS exercise their right to free speech, such as voicing their opinion against the war to free IRAQ, these same AMERICANS are vilified for PRACTICING A DEMOCRATIC RIGHT.

How many people here still FRENCH kiss?

Originally Posted by DFINEST

No....
Where is this question coming from?

I dunno. Considering that the UN is now a relic with no real power, what's the point? We have an organization that has repeatedly threatened Iraq with consequences, but never delievered. When the US decided to go it (mostly) alone, the UN was one of our biggest critics.

I'm wondering why we even fund this dinosaur. Failure to deliever on the goods makes it irrelevant. Almost every member of the UN voted to sanction Iraq. What did we get? A blatant rip off from the "leaders" and a amazing will to NOT act on those sanctions.

Originally Posted by Stickboy

I dunno. Considering that the UN is now a relic with no real power, what's the point? We have an organization that has repeatedly threatened Iraq with consequences, but never delievered. When the US decided to go it (mostly) alone, the UN was one of our biggest critics.

I'm wondering why we even fund this dinosaur. Failure to deliever on the goods makes it irrelevant. Almost every member of the UN voted to sanction Iraq. What did we get? A blatant rip off from the "leaders" and a amazing will to NOT act on those sanctions.

Which is why, for a large part America looks so wrong for going to war. Us going in with such few allies, was a global embarassment. Even counties that went with us didnt really,"Want" to go, so the most of the world claimed we were out of control,"Cowboys" and wouldnt let the inspections work.. this, right after they DIDNT WORK. Its so sad. People whine about no WMDs being found; Bush lied this, Bush lied that. Meanwhile Bush has to come up with a lie to sooth these people,"Oh, look, misintellegence" Wrong awnser n00b; its a simple fact he said he had them, then the said he didnt have them. And he refused to show us his disappearing trick that left no evidence of how he got rid of them.
Then theres Al Quieda. Al Quieda is as linked to Iraq as they are to America; sure they train there, and the learn how to fly here. That doesnt mean we support them! But Al Quieda played a HUGE role, because by Bush even saying,"Well, we should look into connections with Iraq, they said they had WMDs, and our inspectors arent there anymore" Would then bring up the issue of Iraq and their non compliance with our Gulf war(RIght war?) terms. We said,"We no kick you ass, you let weapons inspectors cruise your country" Well Saddam waited until it was a bad political move for Cliton to move against him and kicked them out. So over 4 years later how else do you bring up the failures of a past president? Bush went about it respectfully too, he never pointed at clinton and said,"Its his fault we have to go to war"(Yeah we could have just let the inspectors be bullshitted around for a while again instead of making the "Show us or die" resolution.. But that would have accomplished nothing, and his hate for America would just grow as we longer forced the inspections in Iraq. So he would eventually want to hurt US IMO) But when the shoe was on the other foot.. Clinton had no quarrels bad mouthing Bush to other countries for the war.
Then again at the Demo National Convention He had no problem letting everyone know that a vote for bush was a vote for putting,"These cop killing machines back on the streets" Refering to semi-automatic,"Assault weapons, which are the exact same as non assalt weapons except they are limited on customizations that dont affect lethality anyways.

I seem to have gotten sidetracked. I say we do one of two things.
A: We keep the UN, and keep smacking them with the fact that they're fcking useless and need to step up in future events. or
B: We kick them out and become a
GIANT FKING BABY PITBULL
We'll be the nice cuddly country that helps other countries by sending them loads of our,"Corrupt capitalistic" money, help the hungry, the diseased and the war - torn, assisted in part by the money we save the deleting the UN. But the second someone fucks with us we open up a hole in the ground and have all hell break loose. Official declaration of war time = the same amount they gave us. In the event of 9/11 their warning time would be from the time the nuke rolls out of the plane till it explodes. This plan sounds, to me absolutely wonderful. But I think we would piss off the world so much we would eventually get our assed handed to us north korea = 9 million well trained, armed troops. America = maybe 2 mil? Spread over a giant area, with a public that cant be trusted with semi-automatic weapons thx to dems, not to mention everyone will be too busy arguing over why John and Josh Fag cant marry(Despite the Fag Comment Im Pro-Queer)
So I say keep the UN!
BTW feel free to flame me if you disagree with my political opinion on teh war, Its pure opinion; Im still not sure whats right from left with the damn thing; everyone bends the truth in their favor before we hear it.

"""""""""(Noriega in Panama, Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war, Afghanistan to repel the Soviet invasion)"""""""""

During the cold war there was a higher threat, called communism. Communism, the Soviet Union, was a bigger threat to American lives then all the world tyrants put together. The move to fund the Mujahadeen to repel the Soviets was a brilliant move by America. Better to have Afghans dieing to fight the Soviets then Americans trying to dislodge the Soviet war machine from its stranglehold on the worlds oil should they have succeeded in ever getting the warm water port in S/E Asia, "yeah Afghanistan is landlocked but it was their opening move prior to attacking or subverting Pakistan".

Our assisting Iraq during their war with Iran consisted of providing some intelligence on Iranian forces. Again the chance of Iranian style Islamic fundamentalism taking over the Gulf area was a worse end then sending Saddam some sat pictures on Iranian army movements. We didnt provide, or pay for weapons, to Iraq during that war.

As to central and South America during the cold war? Again there were two options, supporting anti-communist Govt.'s or allowing communism to gain more footholds in our Hemisphere. We had to make cold choices between two evils. In my view we made the right ones because we ended up winning the cold war. In war you take what allies you can. Keeping OUR children safe,secure, and free is more important then anyone elses children. Alone we still have very little hope of establishing democracy in much of the world, let alone the chances 20,30,40 years ago. We have had to do some terrible things in our history. We have incinerated entire citys, killed millions in war. Sometimes we have been wrong, most times we've been right. Its a hardball world out there and hard decisions are sometimes necessary.

The current conflict/genocide in Sudan is an example of the UN again at its worse. America wanted a UN resolution putting economic embargo's on Sudan if they didnt stop supporting the Islamic fanatics who are murdering the black Sudanese. The UN security council said they would veto any such resolution if it contained such tough talk so we had to water it down to a "saddam style" "there will be serious consequences if you dont stop" load of horseshit. Even as it is China, and another tyranny, abstained. The UN has failed the people of Africa again. The Sudanese genocide will go on.

I read a ethnic/liberal newspaper today and you know what the headline was? "US introduces resolution without meaningful penalties on Sudan". This leftist rag went on to portray it as the Bush Administrations fault there wasnt tougher language in the resolution. The reality is just the opposite. Your "world community" of the UN forced Bush to water down the resolution to horseshit. Bush's intent was to severely penalize Sudan with full sanctions if they didnt stop the slaughter.

I guess this newspaper is going to endorse Kerry right? Another dose of reality, no US president has done more for Africa then President Bush. Bush promised billions for the fight against AIDs and he delivered. Economic development, human rights...ect The Bush administration has done more for that continent then any other.

What has the UN done? Look at Bosnia, the Hutu/Tutu genocide, Somalia,Zimbabwe,Tibet, the oil for food fiasco in Iraq, the even made Syria the chair for the human rights commission. They forced us to stop the attack during Gulf-l and let Saddam off the hook to slaughter Shiites by the thousands.

Each and any time the UN has made a difference it has been due to the dollars of American citizens and the blood of our young people. Now its a bloated bureaucracy thats both morally bankrupt and strategically irrelevant. We should have nothing to do with it and nothing to do with these tyranny's without human rights, womans rights, Govt.'s/militarys/police that arent answerable to their citizens. Its time we bulldozed that building and started our own organization that only admits Democracy's.


The Un is fearfull of another 4 years of Bush. They want another American president they can influence and control. They are afraid of a strong and independant America. And we should all be afraid of a America thats controlled by the UN.............take care....................Rich

We will always be the supporters of other countries. Allies to everyone, even though they don't like us. America is turning into one big flower. Keep letting terrorists beddown in our homeland. What's new?

All this aside, our efforts in Iraq have resulted in better and more bodybuilding. Check this link:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...3294994076.jpg

Oh and btw, if you really believe the US is just like any other country, no better or no worse, you should really spend some time overseas. Sorry folks, we are different. You should have a little more faith in yourself and in our beliefs.

I quote from the movie Gladiator:

MAXIMUS: I have seen much of the rest of the world. It is brutal and cruel and dark. Rome is the light. (Insert US where it says Rome)

Originally Posted by rule62

Oh and btw, if you really believe the US is just like any other country, no better or no worse, you should really spend some time overseas. Sorry folks, we are different. You should have a little more faith in yourself and in our beliefs.

I quote from the movie Gladiator:

MAXIMUS: I have seen much of the rest of the world. It is brutal and cruel and dark. Rome is the light. (Insert US where it says Rome)

Dude, who are you referring to? I never said the US is just like any other country. I will be going overseas to Pakistan for four months. LOL. What's your point? I have been in the military for five years now. I support our troops 200% . . . I am a troop. It seems the media is preoccupied with the negative occurrences, without any positive remarks/accomplishments the U.S soldiers have given us.

Originally Posted by Rich46yo

...During the cold war there was a higher threat, called communism. Communism, the Soviet Union, was a bigger threat to American lives then all the world tyrants put together......
The Un is fearfull of another 4 years of Bush....

Then why didn't the argument for a pre-emptive strike didn't
apply here. Don't get me wrong Rich, I'm not questioning the moves that the U.S. has made in relation to the aforementioned conflicts, I just observed that every time this happens, it appears that we always have to topple those governments. I'm also fearful of another four years of Bush but not for the same reasons that the U.N. are fearful of him.

I wasn't referring to you TR, and thanks for the service. I was in Pakistan also in the military a few years back, most of my time was in Karachi. Enjoy the experience, it is an interesting country, but there is a lot of turmoil at the moment. Politics aside, you can get some great buys on rosewood items, persian rugs, etc. I still have an awesome sea chest that I lugged all the way back, with a beautiful, silk rug stuffed inside. Our CO was really cool about it, we had so much stuff crammed into that ship after six months bopping around the Pacific that it looked more like a trading ship than a combat ship.

Originally Posted by rule62

I wasn't referring to you TR, and thanks for the service. I was in Pakistan also in the military a few years back, most of my time was in Karachi. Enjoy the experience, it is an interesting country, but there is a lot of turmoil at the moment. Politics aside, you can get some great buys on rosewood items, persian rugs, etc. I still have an awesome sea chest that I lugged all the way back, with a beautiful, silk rug stuffed inside. Our CO was really cool about it, we had so much stuff crammed into that ship after six months bopping around the Pacific that it looked more like a trading ship than a combat ship.

Rule, no problem. I think I'll be going to Karachi. 120 days. Thanks for the info.
I can't wait to feel the heat! I'll try to stay out of trouble, and out of harms way. lol. I really like the military. We have so many girls in the shop (sometimes guys) that complain how hard our job is . . . military sucks, etc. These people haven't even served but a couple of years (if that). We have a damn desk job for crying out loud. Yeah, the exercises suck. All of the classes you have to take. Training. Gas MASK sucks. True, but you have to look past that. Just because it's your first base, doesn't mean it will be your last base. I just think these kids coming into the military should give it a chance.
O well. Anyway, sorry for all of the BS. Can't think of too much to say. If I have a chance, I'll shoot one of the ragheads for you guys!

aah how much i dislike those americans who think that they are better than the rest of the world. and now you start to talk about leaving UN only because they dont support your governement. well guess what people have their own opinion and US doesnt rule the world. us has lost many times and still doesn't learned a thing. look at afghanistan. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE OF THE WORLD.

Originally Posted by trHawT

If I have a chance, I'll shoot one of the ragheads for you guys!

and this sentence is quite typical of what americans think about other especially about middle-eastern(arabic) people. partially you hate them only because they don't accept your culture and they don't think the way you think.

Anyway these are some thoughts that came to my mind...

No, we tend to hate them because a group of the pychos killed 3,000 people in our country. The people he was referring to shooting are not your everyday Muslims. These are middle-easterners that are gunning for americans.

Rogue, it's not because the UN doesn't support us. Why have a UN? How many resolutions and threats has the UN made to Iraq? Countless. How many times did the UN say what it would do if this or that wasn't done? Countless. How many times has it had the balls to back up what it said? Easy....NONE.

"""""""Then why didn't the argument for a pre-emptive strike didn't
apply here""""""
Im sorry I dont understand, why didnt we pre-empt the Soviets? Because they had about 40,000 nukes thats why. And a much larger standing military. Even still arming the mujahadeen was a pre-emptive strike. Afghanistan showed the whole Soviet Union was rotten to the core, thats its military just wasnt that good. While its true the Soviet Leadership witheld their best troops from Afghanistan, other then some spesnat troops, and always had the force structure undermanned there. The simple fact is that American support for the mujahadeen, most of all stinger missiles and other AA, is what defeated the Soviets.

I dont under stand the "afterwards we have to topple those Govt.'s" part. After the Soviets withdrew there was no taliban. They came later. The Taliban were formed with the help of the Pakistani intelligence service. Again all this was later. We didnt fom the Islamic revolution in Iran either. We had nothing to do with it. If anything we got screwed by the overthrow of the Shahs regime.

I think you statement reflects one of the most remarkable positions the world, mostly thru the UN, takes concerning America. That is "America made them/him/it...ect" The world collective likes to portray America/CIA/Jews as the puppeteer sitting atop the world pulling all on our strings. The latest delusion to hit the streets of the worlds unwashed is "America made Saddam". Now someone explain to me how we made Saddam?

Saddam Hussein rode to power on a combination of Batth party Pan-Arab Nationalism and sheer brutality. If anything this movement hated America and the west. From the very beginning they were allied with the Soviets. We never sold weapons to Saddam, other then buying oil from him we never had meaningful economic ties with Iraq, it would be very dangerous to underestimate Saddam Hussein by saying "anyone" controlled him. But this is the type of horseshit spewed out by the world collective situated at the UN.

Then we have this Lithuanian's crap. Lets deconstruct his manifesto here.

"""""""aah how much i dislike those Americans who think that they are better than the rest of the world. and now you start to talk about leaving UN only because they dont support your government. well guess what people have their own opinion and US doesn't rule the world. us has lost many times and still doesn't learned a thing. look at Afghanistan. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE OF THE WORLD."""""""

Aaaah, We dont give a damn what you think of us. What? Are you saying we dont have a right to pull out of the UN? We haven't spilled enough of our blood, or spent enough of our wealth, saving Europe and shitty little countrys like Lithuania? Hows a little freedom feel over there? Or would you prefer to still be under the boot of the Soviets? Who do you think delivered you from your abject slavery? The United Nations?

Tell me about Afghanistan Professor? Last time I checked we had whats left of the Taliban living in rat holes fearful of our GPS guided thermal bombs cooking their goat herding ignorant asses. But please, Im listening. Heres another history lesson on Lithuania. While brave yanks were fighting nazism the Lithuanians were kissing the ass of every SS corporal that walked down the street. Not only that, but while in organized mobs they beat thousands of their jews to death in the streets shipping the rest off to Auschwitz for a dose of zyklon-B. A few years later, when the commies came marching thru, the Lithuanians switched kissing asses from Nazi to Commie. A great darkness fell over the place, indeed all the Baltics and eastern Europe.

But thru this darkness a light shined. A light called freedom carried by a country called America. We took West Europe and sheltered them under our nuclear umbrella. In effect saying to the commies an attack on free west Europe was an attack on America proper. We never lost sight of those enslaved in the east. We shed our blood fighting communism in every nook of the world, we never backed down. Eventually meaningless,insignificant little shitholes like Lithuania were given the gift of democracy and NATO membership. Today American F-16s are on alert there ready to protect their skies. You wouldnt know it by listening to the citizens of these places. Nowdays their young look at communism with longing. They never lived thru it, so how bad can it be? They blame "America" for not having dollar bills falling from their trees, it never occurred to them that 50 some years of Soviet communism are to blame for their rotting infrastructure/economy's and poisened land.

""""""""and this sentence is quite typical of what Americans think about other especially about middle-eastern(Arabic) people. partially you hate them only because they don't accept your culture and they don't think the way you think.

Anyway these are some thoughts that came to my mind...""""""""

Hahahahahahahah, Yeah go to Lithuania and see what the people there feel about arabs, or jews, or blacks, or purples, or browns. If they could they would still be throwing these "undesirables" into the ovens. A bigger bunch of savages you'd be hard pressed to find. Boy you ought to read some of your own history before you badmouth anyone. THIS is the kind of mind-fucking the United Nations foments, the kind of anti-American propaganda the world leftists collective spews out. THIS is the type of thing that ought to get us the hell out of the UN.

We do have that right dont we loogan? Or is there some UN rule saying America cant leave if we want? Yaknow if we did the UN would gnash itself to pieces like a headless chicken. If we left NATO the alliance would crumble. If we retreated from the world the dream of freedom for millions would vanish. Who would take up the torch and make the hard decisions? Lithuania? Maybe you can point to an example of "when" we "forced our culture" onto anyone. Ive been out in the world my friend, and in Muslim countries, and Ive seen them lined up like sheep to buy Yank CDs,movies,blue jeans, and whiskey. And I never ,ever saw an American holding a gun to their heads to do so. Damn you Europeans are simple! Come to think of it the Lithuanians are lined up like whores to buy the latest Hollywood fare. Damn those pesky Yanks forceing you to give up your own culture like that. Did you know we had 4 Ohio class Trident SLBMc pointing their D-5 MIRVed missiles at Lithuania with the expressive order to "assimulate into out culture or we will anhiliate your country with two-stage warheads set to blow at 450kt"? Yaknow it kinda makes me feel like a Borg from Star Trek, "YOU WILL BE ASSIMULATED".

Anyway these are some thoughts that came to my mind........take care.......... ..................Rich

Originally Posted by roguexx2

aah how much i dislike those americans who think that they are better than the rest of the world. and now you start to talk about leaving UN only because they dont support your governement. well guess what people have their own opinion and US doesnt rule the world. us has lost many times and still doesn't learned a thing. look at afghanistan. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE OF THE WORLD.


and this sentence is quite typical of what americans think about other especially about middle-eastern(arabic) people. partially you hate them only because they don't accept your culture and they don't think the way you think.

Anyway these are some thoughts that came to my mind...

LOL. We ARE better. UN is a joke. However, we help these third-world losers, and we get fucked in the ass for it. Yeah, let one of those fuckers try ANYTHING, I wouldn't hesistate to put a bullet in their head. Shoot first, ask questions later. No, we don't hate them because YOU/OTHERS don't accept us. When innocent americans are getting gunned down for no reason, fucking decapitated, how do you THINK WE are going to react? Barbaric if you ask me. Are you nuts just like Al Queda? You probably support them. lol. I'll be SURE to take one out when I get there.

Originally Posted by roguexx2

aah how much i dislike those americans who think that they are better than the rest of the world. and now you start to talk about leaving UN only because they dont support your governement. well guess what people have their own opinion and US doesnt rule the world. us has lost many times and still doesn't learned a thing. look at afghanistan. YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE OF THE WORLD.


and this sentence is quite typical of what americans think about other especially about middle-eastern(arabic) people. partially you hate them only because they don't accept your culture and they don't think the way you think.

Anyway these are some thoughts that came to my mind...

Blah Blah, and just like the rest of the world to choose one sentance as a stereotype for the rest of the US. Most people that do that the world calls biased You know, no different than someone that kills somebody because of their birth place or religion (etc, etc). You're going to argue it, but lets not get all boring about it Roguexx, thats exactly what yür feelings are, arent they? I'm not going to talk about how bad and mighty the US is, but about how almost half the US doesnt support Bush in the re-election and probably +40% dont support the war in Iraq. I could probably dig up stats on that if it gives you wood. So anyways, I cant see which foot you are standing on (regardlesss of who I support).

A growing amount of the US is Muslim. Its probably the #1 growing religion in the US still. So, if you want to have an arguement roguexx2 lets have at it. If not, I really dont have time to circle jerk just to make you smile.

moce boce
Justin

The UN is a useless bureacracy that does little. But it should remain as a symbol of international untiey and attempt at achieving....something. As for U.S. involvement, it doesn't matter to me. The UN is another puppet of Israel that makes the U.S. look bad by the way it votes.

Also, Koffi Annan is a racist as*hole. Hope someone gets him in a car bomb.

It would make my day....

Rogue, it's not because the UN doesn't support us. Why have a UN? How many resolutions and threats has the UN made to Iraq? Countless. How many times did the UN say what it would do if this or that wasn't done? Countless. How many times has it had the balls to back up what it said? Easy....NONE.

So u may think the only good way of doing anything is by military invasion. Maybe UN wasn't very effective in Iraq but it has helped countless times to other countries. And by the way conception of the UN is not only that it's coordinating all its members do do anything together at all.

Blah Blah, and just like the rest of the world to choose one sentance as a stereotype for the rest of the US. Most people that do that the world calls biased

well yes of course i'm biased (do i understand this word right?it's the same as slanted? ) cos i see what's happening and i have an opinion about it.

You know, no different than someone that kills somebody because of their birth place or religion (etc, etc). You're going to argue it, but lets not get all boring about it Roguexx, thats exactly what yür feelings are, arent they? I'm not going to talk about how bad and mighty the US is, but about how almost half the US doesnt support Bush in the re-election and probably +40% dont support the war in Iraq. I could probably dig up stats on that if it gives you wood. So anyways, I cant see which foot you are standing on (regardlesss of who I support).
i know what's happening in the US and i know that people don't support Bush as they have supported him before(i think 70% supported invasion to iraq or am i wrong) and thats almost as bad as if they would support him now. it's dangerous that most powerful country in the world is so impulsive. partially you start(yes start) all these conflicts to use your military power (300 billion $ a year right?)

A growing amount of the US is Muslim. Its probably the #1 growing religion in the US still. So, if you want to have an arguement roguexx2 lets have at it. If not, I really dont have time to circle jerk just to make you smile.

totally didn't understood what r u trying to say here..

No, military force should only be used as a last resort. In Iraq's case, they signed agreements and were given year after year to comply. The UN body chose to do nothing other than apply more sanctions and veiled threats. By refusing to back up their sanctions the UN made itself irrelevant in these matters.

I firmly believe every country has a right to defend itself against perceived threats regardless of the what the UN has to say about it. Most countries in the UN would be overjoyed for the US to be slapped around (like France). With friends like that, who needs enemies?

If we ever did pull out of the UN, guess what? There wouldn't be a UN anymore. We fund almost half of it.

The United Nations serves a lot of purposes, including use as an avenue for us to gain information and establish contact with nations that we don't have good diplomatic relations with - and has often been used as a means for conflicting powers to keep some kind of dialogue and extend feelers to each other to help ease tensions. But more than that, U.N. agencies help coordinate multilateral cooperation in areas of health, education, famine relief, human rights, and scientific dialogue that enables new breakthroughs in medicine to be extended to other countries more quickly. Despite the many flaws in conflict resolution in the more recent past, it was instrumental in supporting South Korea, for example, and has served as a buffer in many conflicts.

Simply storming out of a world organization usually has done more harm than good to a country's image. Without our presence, Security Council resolutions that we strongly dislike could pass with ease (just look at what happened when the Soviets walked out for months) and it would be even easier for the rogue nations to foster more conflict and condemnation with us.

Despite your self-proclaimed view as a "historian" Rich, you seem to overlook quite a few common facts about Lithuania and it's involvement in World War II. Since the Soviet Union annexed the nation prior to the German invasion of the U.S.S.R. and had operated in it's own oppressive and violent manner (without any intervention by the U.S. at the time), Lithuanians naturally initially thought that the Germans were "liberators." This was much the same case as people in the Ukraine, other Baltic states, and in the pro-Nazi attitude of Finland, who had fought a recent war with the Soviets at the time.

Even though it's popular among the American right to project a neo-master race theory about this nation, we weren't exactly jumping into the conflict the minute Hitler's armies went on the move. Nor were we too concerned about shining a light of freedom for an occupied continent, preferring to maintain diplomatic relations with Hitler and keep our noses out of the conflict. It was a rather wise move for us at the time, since we didn't possess a military capability to do much, though our industrial sector started making some money producing war supplies.

For nearly two years, the only "brave Yanks" fighting in that war were volunteers in China and Britain. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and other Commonwealth countries were involved in the war effort long before we decided to get involved.

Unfortunately, the occupation of Eastern Europe was arranged in agreements we signed during and just after the War. Since the communist Soviets were our ally, and had borne the brunt of the land war with Germany until 1943 and 1944, they were allowed occupation zones throughout their sphere of influence. If we thought they intended to guarantee democratic governments, we were rather naive. Of course, we didn't get involved when Hungary revolted in 1956, or when Czechoslovakia began liberalizing in 1968 and we didn't intervene when Soviet tanks put down those uprisings.

I can imagine that the Soviets could have projected your same philosophy of "freeing" people when our support of a corrupt Cuban government resulted in a communist coup, or when we failed to reinforce the Nationalist Chinese while Mao gathered strength and launched his civil war. We fudged on our Geneva agreement over Vietnam and ended up in a French-created colonial mess for 20 years. So we've made our share of mistakes in trying to keep the world free.

Our nuclear umbrella might have helped protect Western Europe, but both the British and French developed independent capabilities. We initially started withdrawing large numbers of our troops from Europe following the War, until we realized that the Soviets had no intention of doing the same and we were fearful of the large growth of communist parties in both France and Italy, both nations nearly economically bankrupt. France, of course, was still trying to hold onto their colonial empire, even if they were unable to finance or supply their military.

Nice post KBM.

If the US ever walked, I think many countries would walk with us. After all, if not for the generostity of the american people many countries would be bankrupt and starving. Leaders of those countries would likely side with the US. The US would simply establish another body to do essentially what the UN does. Except France probably wouldn't be invited.

Sure the UN provides food, healthcare, etc. but that's going to be hard to do without US funding. That's a good thing, but look at the UN in Somolia. Sure they delievered food and healthcare - to the warlords. They couldn't secure their own operation.

We have been generous, and it's because we've had the means to do so over the last 60 years. But at the same time, we aren't the only nation making contributions, and we get into problems when our Administration attaches strings to our funding based on a religious or ideological viewpoint rather than meeting a need for the rest of the world. When that occurs, we look just as guilty as other theocratic nations.

And, as liberal as many of you think our media is, it hasn't gone unnoticed in the rest of the world that we never publicly acknowledge assistance when we suffer natural disasters in our own country. I can remember when the Canadians sent a navy ship full of blankets, medical supplies and other assistance to Miami right after Hurricane Andrew decimated southern Florida - with no mention of the gesture in our own press.
While we can't expect a nation of 30 million people to match the money 300 million of us can provide, we aren't always very grateful for the things others have done at their own expense and sacrifice.

Canada should just be glad we don't annex them by force.


(I'm kidding, of course)

"""""""Maybe UN wasn't very effective in Iraq but it has helped countless times to other countries""""""""""

When.............Where?

"""""""The UN is a useless bureacracy that does little. But it should remain as a symbol of international untiey and attempt at achieving....something. As for U.S. involvement, it doesn't matter to me. The UN is another puppet of Israel that makes the U.S. look bad by the way it votes.

Also, Koffi Annan is a racist as*hole. Hope someone gets him in a car bomb.

It would make my day...."""""""""""""

Do you really think the UN is a puppet of, and controlled by, the tiny state of Israel? You havnt seen the hostility against Israel by this organization? Ya did know Israel is the ONLY democracy in the MidEast right, with many,many Arab citizens who enjoy full rights just like Jewish? And while were at it please explain "when" the UN has been a symbol of INTL unity? If anything its been a expression of disunity. Something like NATO or SATO have been examples of free nations showing unity.

""""""""""The United Nations serves a lot of purposes, including use as an avenue for us to gain information and establish contact with nations that we don't have good diplomatic relations with - and has often been used as a means for conflicting powers to keep some kind of dialogue and extend feelers to each other to help ease tensions. But more than that, U.N. agencies help coordinate multilateral cooperation in areas of health, education, famine relief, human rights, and scientific dialogue that enables new breakthroughs in medicine to be extended to other countries more quickly. Despite the many flaws in conflict resolution in the more recent past, it was instrumental in supporting South Korea, for example, and has served as a buffer in many conflicts.""""""

Sorry, but this is the carefully crafted public image the UN has exported to this stupid world. While theres no doubt there have been "some" good programs what America has to ask herself is "could all the billions weve spent on this beaurocratic machine been better spent elswhere, and differently". Again the UN likes to spew out a public image thats its an organization something like Star Treks "United Federation of Planets", kinda like a higher human Ideal.

But heres the difference! The United Nations is answerable to no-one. None of its leaders have been voted in by the citizens of its host countries. It can spend,steal,cater to, and do what it wants without any oversight. Its actually the most Un-Democratic of Institutions.http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/I..._040420-1.html

For every one group of people its helped it has failed 10. It has never,ever been effective without US backing. And most disturbing this wretched Institution, largely made up of Tyrranys,dictatorships, and fanatics, is positioning itself for global goverment. THAT is the ultimate goal of the UN. To be THE global Govt.http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39877cba11c1.htm

"""""""Simply storming out of a world organization usually has done more harm than good to a country's image. Without our presence, Security Council resolutions that we strongly dislike could pass with ease (just look at what happened when the Soviets walked out for months) and it would be even easier for the rogue nations to foster more conflict and condemnation with us. """""""""

Who said anything about "storming out"? Why do liberals always associate emotion with action that are against their manifesto? And who cares what they pass, last time I checked America was the most powerful nation in Human History. I suggest simply "leaveing", we can even smile on the way out. We'll see how long those shitbirds can last without Yank funding. THEN! America can start, and lead, a world organization where-as only nations with democratic values are accepted. Nations that have freedoms for their people, womans rights, freedom of press, military and Police that are answerable to the people, leaders that are elected to set terms, nations that dont allow the secret police to crash your door in at 0300 and take you away never to be heard from again...............Sound like a good idea to you? Even better the leadership of this organization could actually be elected by the citizens of member democratic nations.

Even still, even with just such an organization. The US constitution is set in stone! America will never be governed by ANY outside organization, not as long as I live!

"""""""Despite your self-proclaimed view as a "historian" Rich, you seem to overlook quite a few common facts about Lithuania and it's involvement in World War II. Since the Soviet Union annexed the nation prior to the German invasion of the U.S.S.R. and had operated in it's own oppressive and violent manner (without any intervention by the U.S. at the time), Lithuanians naturally initially thought that the Germans were "liberators." This was much the same case as people in the Ukraine, other Baltic states, and in the pro-Nazi attitude of Finland, who had fought a recent war with the Soviets at the time. """""""""

I dont blame my parents generation for not wanting to get involved in more of Europes bullshit in 1939. Keep in mind we were just emergeing from a devestating economic meltdown. Our military was one of the smallest in the world at the time. America wasnt a true world power in 1939. You are viewing history thru a 2004 lens, not a 1939 one. While its true many nations fought the nazis, most of all England and her commonwealth who stood alone, there is no question that it was Americas involvment that tipped the war against the Axis. And not just thru military means. The US became the most powerful industrial machine in human history during the war. And after it, instead of becoming tyrants and conqerors like the commies, we gave freedom to both west Europe and much of Asia. Thats the first time Ive heard "neo-master race" being associated with the "right" however. Congratualations! Yaknow many members of "the right" actually fought in this nations wars and were directly responsable for spreading freedom around the world. You didnt think "the left" actually fought did you? "Neo-Master-race".........thats beautiful.......

""""""""" Lithuanians naturally initially thought that the Germans were "liberators." This was much the same case as people in the Ukraine, other Baltic states, and in the pro-Nazi attitude of Finland, who had fought a recent war with the Soviets at the time. """"""""

Yeah..........Nazis as liberators. I will never forget the rape gangs and murder squads made up of ethnic Lithuanian, Estonian. and Latvian civilians being loosed upon the helpless Jews who were fellow citizens. While the Einsatszgruppen looked on with approval the citizens of the Baltics fell to their work with gusto. Nazisim gave them the perfect political outlet to express both their barbarity and tribalism. As for Nazis being their Liberators? Originally Lithuania fell under the German sphere of influence as concluded by the German/Soviet,Ribbonthrop.Molotiv non-aggression pact of 1939. After Lithunias failure to join Germany in the attack on Poland Hitler "gave" the Soviets Lithuania back in Sept. 1939. In a 2nd secret German/Soviet agreement.

""""""""Unfortunately, the occupation of Eastern Europe was arranged in agreements we signed during and just after the War. Since the communist Soviets were our ally, and had borne the brunt of the land war with Germany until 1943 and 1944, they were allowed occupation zones throughout their sphere of influence. If we thought they intended to guarantee democratic governments, we were rather naive. Of course, we didn't get involved when Hungary revolted in 1956, or when Czechoslovakia began liberalizing in 1968 and we didn't intervene when Soviet tanks put down those uprisings. """"

Sadly this is "mostly" true. However what were our choices in 1945? We were a nation already bled out by war and rejoicing for peace. Even more so our allies in England and elsewhere. Over 50,000,000 human beings had just died in WW-ll. What were we supposed to do? Kill another 50,000,000? Anhiliate the Soviet Union with nukes? No, while I think FDR gave away to much at Yalta, continueing the war and the suffering was just not an option. To our credit West Europe and West Germany got the Marshall Plan, elections, economic prosperity, forgiveness, and freedom. We continued our fight against oppression thru examples of Democracy in Western Europe. Just because we didnt continue a horribly destructive war doesnt mean we were the oppresors of Eastern Europe. THAT crime firmly belongs with the Soviets. To have intervened in Hungary and/or Czechoslovakia would have tripped a world war with the possability of nuclear exchange. The strongest voices against intervention came from our NATO allies, not the US. Without full NATO concurrance there was no way our military could have intervened. A democracy cant take over a NATO allies country in order to launch an attack on another without their OK. But you know that.

In the final analysis we were right. We beat communism without destroying the world with nuclear weapons.

"""""""""I can imagine that the Soviets could have projected your same philosophy of "freeing" people when our support of a corrupt Cuban government resulted in a communist coup, or when we failed to reinforce the Nationalist Chinese while Mao gathered strength and launched his civil war. We fudged on our Geneva agreement over Vietnam and ended up in a French-created colonial mess for 20 years. So we've made our share of mistakes in trying to keep the world free."""""""

No question about that. Tell me what do you think? Is Cuba "free" ? Did the Soviets, Castro, and communism free them? Is Vietnam free? Did communism free them. We didnt fudge anything over Geneva and North Vietnam. North Vietnam violated its agreement and continued to attack the south.

We pulled large amounts of citizen soldiers out of West Europe after the war because the war was over and the cotizens of America wanted them home. What are you saying? We should have kept them there and attacked the Soviet union? True Britain and France developed their own capabilities but they were miniscule compared to Americans and the USSR's. They never had a true deterrant capability against communism. The commies however were fearful of Americas nuclear might.

Im sorry I had to hurry thru this but I have to go to work.....................Take care......................Rich

1700 word posts are not to be classified as "had to hurry".