06-02-2003 06:08									#31
	Support Apolyton

*ahem*





we are missing something....

Attachment: bana.jpg
This has been downloaded 116 time(s).

	06-02-2003 06:13									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

GePap, the constitution of the US protects your right to advocate its overthrow.

	06-02-2003 06:19									#33
	Tired of ads?

Lancer: huh ??

All I said is that I think the "hang all the libertarians" project can easily go ahead prior to any revolution. After all, it is the sensible thing to do.

Hang 'em high!

	06-02-2003 06:39									#34
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by GePap Thankfully though, such abjectly moronic notions will always fail: after all, as Che would say, the government is run by corporate business interests, and most rich business men know how much a stable world means to their pocket book.

Good point. So let's talk about something all Americans understand - money.

If we didn't have the UN it would inevitablly fall to the United States to play the role of global policeman and particularly to safeguard global commerce and trade.

You say the outside world can go to hell? Corporate America doesn't see it like that. The expenses involved in playing this role would make the costs of the war on Iraq look like child's play. Imagine 3 or 4 Iraqs going on at any one time - US forces deployed on every continent, the US navy engaged at every trouble spot, drawn into every international conflict. By contrast, the UN system isn't perfect but it keeps order in the world on the cheap - and every UN Member contributes to the costs.

The last Great Power to play this global policeman role was Britain and it pretty much bankrupted the country over time. Britain's place as the world's leading economic power declined rapidly once it moved from global mercantilism to global empire. Britain was almost continuously at war during the 18th and 19th century, from colonial wars to big wars with the other Great Powers. Everyone was trying to knock them off. In every corner of the globe Britain was engaged, and governments in Westminster found themselves powerless to avoid engagement even when they tried hard to stay out.

And what thanks did the Brits get for keeping order in the world and making the world's oceans safe for commerce and trade? Zip.

	06-02-2003 06:45									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Britain's place as the world's leading economic power declined rapidly once it moved from global mercantilism to global empire.

To be fair, the US is declining in relative terms as well, with or without the UN, with or without empire.

	06-02-2003 06:54									#36
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Right - and you will decline must faster without the UN system.

And this is the real concern behind the war in Iraq - maintaining US global dominance. The Administration has said so publicly.

But you conservative Republicans out there should really think about unilateralism means in terms of your hip pocket nerve i.e. more government debt or more taxes. Choose your poison.

Britain faced countless Iraqs. The arguments for British intervention were almost exactly the same.

	06-02-2003 07:05									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Iraq isn't going to hurt the United States in the pocket book too badly. And I don't think we're after "countless" Iraqs. We've got a list of three, with at least one that won't cost much (Iran). True, NK does have a high risk level.

	06-02-2003 07:06									#38
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

famous last words..............look at the budget deficit Bush is running just to fund this war!!!!!!!!!!!!!

	06-02-2003 07:11									#39
	Got spare money?

You're silly. It's nothing like the deficits Reagan ran to win the Cold War.

	06-02-2003 07:16									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Its only the beginning. If you want to use a Cold War analogy, think of 9/11 as 1948 and start counting. Meanwhile the Euros forge ahead without the burden of these costs.

And its going to cost you a fortune. UN mediation is slow and sometimes annoying but so much more cost effective.

	06-02-2003 07:23									#41
	Put an end to popups!

AH, I just don't see how the UN is having that great an effect. France is going to veto...

	06-02-2003 07:23									#42
	Got spare money?

UN mediation is slow and sometimes annoying but so much more cost effective.

I don't dispute this. It's their job to stop situations from becoming the Iraqs of the next decade. The US can pick the highlights.

If you want to use a Cold War analogy

It wasn't an analogy. It was a contrast.

	06-02-2003 07:25									#43
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I was the one using the analogy, smart arse

	06-02-2003 07:27									#44
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I can't believe the level of whining here. The US is having some trouble getting UN approval for one bloody thing it wants to do, and suddenly it's time to just pull out, let the whole damn thing collapse. I'll be the first to admit that the system is far from perfect, but if you think that just throwing up your hands and saying "that's it, screw the UN" is the optimal response to resistance for invading Iraq, then you have your heads too far up your asses to listen to reason.

Or, perhaps some of you UN haters can suggest how not having/creating a new UN would magically make things better?

	06-02-2003 07:27									#45
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Lancer AH, I just don't see how the UN is having that great an effect. France is going to veto...

I doubt it - a lot of the debate here has been premature. At the end of the day I think the US will get Security Council support. So chill out boys

	06-02-2003 07:29									#46
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by DanS Iraq isn't going to hurt the United States in the pocket book too badly. And I don't think we're after "countless" Iraqs. We've got a list of three, with at least one that won't cost much (Iran). True, NK does have a high risk level.

We have three today... but once you destroy the system, don't expect many states to decide to stay non-nuclear or keep their hands of Bio and chemical weapons. And then of course someone might decide that they need long range missiles too, and that the current geenration of chemical and biological weapons don't kill enough people cheaply enough. One destroys the world order at their own risk. There is no reason why the next one should be so nice as the last. The US benefits immensely from the UN, and would be one of the big losers in getting rid of it.

But again, the US will not leave the UN: even if it were to become "irrelevant" in terms of fighting the wars the US wants to fight, all the other bits, such as WHO, WTO, IMF and so forth are simply too valuable. So go on whishing the US leave the UN on its own: Its one wish you won't get (and pray you don't either)

	06-02-2003 07:37									#47
	Support Apolyton

I disagree. The French won't come in.

The UN is useless. If the US trys to give UN mandates some backbone then the UN wimps out. They are more of a hinderance to the US than anything, and we pay to keep the lights on in the place.

	06-02-2003 07:40									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Lancer I disagree. The French won't come in.

Just wait and see what happens

A lot of that posturing in Europe was purely for domestic consumption.

	06-02-2003 07:43									#49
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Even if so, I think the French actions in particular did not serve the cause of peace. They let off the pressure on Iraq at a critical time.

	06-02-2003 07:44									#50
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Withdrawing from the UN would be a stupid idea. We would be the only country besides the Vatican not to be in it. Withdrawing from the UN would needlessly undermine our diplomatic relations with little benefit. We have the ability to ignore the UN and we can do that if the UN does something we really don't like, but to withdraw from the UN would make no sense.

	06-02-2003 07:57									#51
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

US foreign policy should not hinge on a decision of the ****ing French at any rate. If France doesn't come in then everyone who says 'the US should get UN approval' have their reason for flaming the US when the US invades Iraq. Because of a decision of the nations of the world? Hell no, because of the ****ing French.

The UN is powerless to act in support of its own mandates because of the politics of nations on the security council. The US shouldn't support an organization that impedes our foriegn policy. Providing France or Russia or China a stage from which to voice an opinion on whether the US takes out a mass murdering two bit dictator is just too absurd to support.

	06-02-2003 07:57									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by DanS Even if so, I think the French actions in particular did not serve the cause of peace. They let off the pressure on Iraq at a critical time.

Nah - they just gave the Administration a reality check - which many would argue this Administration badly needed.

I think many Americans are taken in by Government spin on the UN. Of course the Administration blames the UN when they claim they aren't getting what they want. Its all part of the politics. But I can tell you that when US really wants something in any international organisation, they get it. The US is the 900 pound gorilla in the UN and everywhere else.

	06-02-2003 08:46									#53
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

they just gave the Administration a reality check

What was the substance of this reality check?

	06-02-2003 08:52									#54
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The main problem is Bush Administration unilateralism. What France and Germany are doing is reminding the US they aren't a one man band.

Look at all the hoops they are making the US jump through, the Powell thing and so on, LOL. That's what its about.

	06-02-2003 09:03									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

To my way of thinking, the UN is our best hope at lasting world peace, but ONLY if we don't give up on it.

Instead of not playing ball, we need to give it teeth and a purpose. We need to push reforms through to turn it into more of a positive (as has already been pointed out, the Security Council does not equal the whole of the UN, and there are some things it does well).

Change is needed if it is to become an instrument of peace, however, and we are uniquely positioned to be the instruments OF that change.

Not playing ball is not the answer.

Action from within the UN is the answer.

Leading by example is the answer.

Shouldering the greater weight of UN burdens is the answer.

As it stands right now though, the UN Security Council IS useless. Might as well wipe your arse with the "resoultions" they pass, for all the strength and weight they carry.

But the answer is to change that, not chuck the whole system.

-=Vel=-

	06-02-2003 09:05									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I don't buy it. Bush has been multilateral in most of what he has done. It's a convenient thing for others to use as a intellectual crutch when they can't stand on the principle of a position. Just like some anti-UN blathering in the US.

As for the hoops, perhaps so. But we aren't just another EU country that France can be petulant with; they have real interests that we can either protect or not. And Russia vetoed Kosovo, so the possibility is there that they will do the same here. Germany isn't part of the band anyway. We respect Russia's opinion a lot more than Germany's.

	06-02-2003 09:11									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

stay in the un for now. the leaving is worse even if france vetos imo.

	06-02-2003 09:17									#58
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by DanS I don't buy it. Bush has been multilateral in most of what he has done. It's a convenient thing for others to use as a intellectual crutch when they can't stand on the principle of a position. Just like some anti-UN blathering in the US.

Remember - its all just posturing before the UN vote, and the voters at home.

quote: As for the hoops, perhaps so. But we aren't just another EU country that France can be petulant with; they have real interests that we can either protect or not.

The French are petulant with everybody - and that's the point - you are just another country.

quote: And Russia vetoed Kosovo, so the possibility is there that they will do the same here. Germany isn't part of the band anyway. We respect Russia's opinion a lot more than Germany's.

Germany is very important. Ignore them at your peril. But they will fall into line.

Russia needs US economic support and a free hand in Chechnya. They won't be a problem.

	06-02-2003 09:30									#59
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

should the US leave the UN.

short answer: no

long answer: of course not

	06-02-2003 09:30									#60
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse The main problem is Bush Administration unilateralism. What France and Germany are doing is reminding the US they aren't a one man band. Look at all the hoops they are making the US jump through, the Powell thing and so on, LOL. That's what its about.

I actually agree with pretty much everything you've stated, but, look at it from the US POV for a moment...

(a) To "force" the other countries into line they generally have to compromise in something else. Politics again but as most US actions are not generally of direct and immediate benefit to the US (or are of much more of a benefit to other nations than they are to the US) at some point they may just get fed up with the whole thing.

(b) The US then goes ahead and does the lions share of the "work" anyway. Others may contribute but on nowhere near the same scale.

(c) Then they get flamed for not doing it better, or with less casualties inflicted, or for not picking up every piece afterwards.



(c) is pretty much inevitable but if they're doing (b) then why on earth should they bother with (a)?