matay_brit said:
I have took the view that the UN does not have enough power, i have never back-tracked. Where have i back-tracked when i'm "confronted with fact" I believe that the UN should have more power then it has, i havent tried to play both sides.
If I misunderstood I apologize, but the speed at which this forum moves can create fast reads, we probably had a communication mishap.
Yes you have earned your opinion, yet your opinion should not over-rule everyone else's. I'm sorry i didnt understand the last sentence of that, i'm 18.
I don't mind other opinions towards U.S. foreign policy, don't get me wrong, but I cannot stand when another country or body dictates what we should do within our borders. We will probably just have to disagree on that.
other nations should definetly influence your policy, how can you not see that? Can't you see that if you only look out for urself then everyone else may and probably will suffer as a result. kyoto treaty example.
We will have to definitely disagree on this one, the thing is that the U.S. is trying to get limited to non-polluting technologies in place, but again, if we tank our economy or hurt it that can only slow down our progress, the tech sector requires rediculous amounts of money which could be lost through the Kyoto treaty(an opinion I subscribe to).
Oh so you think because America has the most money that it automatically should control the UN and the world is that it?
Don't misunderstand here, I don't think we should control the U.N. but it should stay out of our internal business and matters of safety, debate and diplomacy are fine, and in fact essential, but it should stay at that particular stage.
please especially make a point of this one. Americas the boss and we have the arrogance to not do what you say. hmmm
Alright, that was said out of anger, basically to expand on that I feel that we are not getting value for our investment, in other words the more we give in terms of money, troop contributions and political concession, the more is asked of us, the reason I used that particular analogy was not to say any member countries are less than us, rather to say that we as big contributors often get the shaft, we are asked to step things up on behalf of the U.N. and in fact do, but when it comes down to diplomatic efforts we get alot of daggers lobbed at us, we constantly get smeared, and frankly, a growing number of Americans are getting sick of it. Most of the heat comes from countries who are upset at U.N. initiatives and after we take the flak, the hands come out again. Sorry if that sounded arrogant in shortened form.
The very point of the UN is that it's ruled by everyone not just America or anyone else, yunno many opinions.?
That is the way it is supposed to work, the idea looks great on paper, but one thing that is showing about all of the differing opinions is that many differing opinions are based on a particular regions agenda, these are the votes that make action in said reason difficult. Also, many different agendas collide and make it almost impossible to take decisive action on anything, it's almost like trying to order the same kind of pizza for a party, no one agrees.
If punishing yourself means cutting back on pollution, and taking an interest in what every other country in the world thinks, then yes, you should punish yourselves.
Cutting back on pollution will come naturally, but it could be impossible to regain economic ground lost because of a bad treaty, thus not a good deal, we do take an interest in others opinions and in fact lead the world in charitable giving and do much for peacekeeping efforts, but as I said earlier, it is never considered enough, the hands always come back out. Also, if world opinion leads to something that could damage our country, then we must do what is right for ourselves, much like all people worldwide, we can listen, but ultimately must do what's conducive to our needs as all countries do.
You obviously interpret what i believe wrongly. If the majority of people think its wrong, then yes i think it is. So if that tanzanian joined up with canadian, british, australian, brazilian, chinese, Japanese, French, German and Swedish chief foreign diplomats then possibly yeah. You don't seem to realise just how much you actually influence everyone else.
This goes back to the internal affairs argument, I don't mind if a country thinks we are dealing unfairly with other countries or thinks we could do things a better way, please, by all means share the opinion. But like I stated earlier, these opinions should not pertain to our laws, economic system, or way of life.
Worst statement ever! erm Iraq, Afganistan, globalisation the fact that America basically controls the world through business, thats not leaving the world alone!
Iraq needs to be reformed, the U.N. has been complaining about the country for over a decade, we just set things into action, Afghanistan and the Taliban needed to be done, they were terrorists allies and were our business(Yes, I know we created them, we effed up) As far as economics go, we control alot of that because we are well off, most of it comes from investment and I won't deny that some abuse is probably there, but that's quite different from meddling in others affairs.
Pollution! affects everyone not just U.
I don't think anyone really knows the true effects of pollution because there are so many conflicting reports for multiple sources, that's a tricky debate.
Taking advantage of Africa through trade, yeah ok you've proved that you leave everyone else alone.
Like I said, economics are a totally different animal, we do trade with Africa, but because of economic law it will be done at a mutually agreed on price, most of the problem with Africa's economy comes from despotic governments that control the money, ultimately the laborers and powerless suffer, maybe we shouldn't trade with them, but they have many things that we need, another tricky situation.
erm no Israel was our fault, the British, yeah sorry about that one guys, point taken that it doesnt do enough of the right stuff in Israel.
Israel was created through the U.N. but I think on a Brittish initiative, we still backed the process though, like I said, the Israellis are great people and the biggest problem is that the muslims surrounding them were given the shaft, it's a problem and hard to fix.
The UN yeahhh i'm sure that was after the 2 world wars wasn't it huh?
Yes, the U.N. was, it was meant to replace the League of Nations which failed miserably after WWI, thus, WWII happened. The big problem is that the U.N. was set up so that WWIII couldn't happen but hard feelings in the muslim world were not considered at the time, also, the big problem with the U.N. is that you will have hard feelings because of radical differences in opinion and agenda, this could, but hopefully won't lead to rampant conflict. Time will tell though.
oh by the way i'm sorry for my being rude to you i get an ickle bit accentuated sometimes, my point is basically America only looks out for America, that's bad. in my opinion.
Apology accepted and also extended. Yes America does look out for ourselves, but we do many things that benefit others, as any country does.