Can we trust the UN?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by darthmalt16, Sep 19, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    It's true in part, but I am not sure if the programmes I'm aware of are in the public domain.

    E_S
  2. Mr44 VIP

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 6
    Oh, I'm sure that's true, it's the mostly part that I don't think is accurate anymore, as in:

    until you distill it down to it being mostly military aid and political compatability projects...

    The percentages are reversed, so political-based aid is no longer the major portion.
  3. J-Rod Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2004
    star 5
    This is one reason I hate the UN.

    Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez took his verbal battle with the United States to the floor of the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, calling President Bush "the devil." "The devil came here yesterday," Chavez said. "He came here talking as if he were the owner of the world."
    The leftist leader, who joined Iran last week in an alliance against U.S. influence, accused Washington of "domination, exploitation and pillage of peoples of the world."


    A world socialist like Chavez is allowed to get in front of the UN and say things that even he doesn't believe. Then the statements are given merit by the media who replay them in sympathetic, countries for the benefit of their uneducated masses.

    God I hate the UN.
  4. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    Now, we know that ingorance breeds fear and intolerance, and we'll seen it demonstrated you are ignorant of the fundamentals of the UN. So, I'll just let you sit there and hate it because after all, it's entirely the UN's fault Chavez is a git. You are so righteous in your fury, it's as if God himself guided your rage to the most appropriate target for blame.

    J-Rod, honestly, I'd suggest thinking and researching before speaking. Probably one of the most vacuous assignments of blame since Wolfy blamed Iraq for 9/11...

    :rolleyes:

    E_S
  5. Espaldapalabras Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 25, 2005
    star 5
    We really should start a thread on American Exceptionalism, except somehow foreigners get upset when you suggest your actions were God's will.
  6. J-Rod Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2004
    star 5
    Ignorant of the fundamentals of the UN? Hell son, those fundamentals are: a lack of willingness to enforce their own resolutions, profiting from sanctions, Kofi finding new and better ways of promoting sexual assault (both with his "peacekeepers" and is own administration), and keeping his son safe from prosecution.

    And now Chavez is in Harlem preaching socialism with Danny Glover to those most likely to accept his message; the lazy, infirmed and uneducated.
  7. heels1785 SWC Jedi Draft Commissioner

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Dec 10, 2003
    star 6
    Well, you know Americans don't appreciate Hugo Chavez when Charlie Rangel and Nancy Pelosi attack him vehemently.

    Drudge just ran a quote from Rangel that almost made me rub my eyes out, it was so unbelievable: 'You do not come into my country, my congressional district, and you do not condemn my president. If there is any criticism of President Bush, it should be restricted to Americans, whether they voted for him or not. I just want to make it abundantly clear to Hugo Chavez or any other president, do not come to the United States and think because we have problems with our president that any foreigner can come to our country and not think that Americans do not feel offended when you offend our Chief of State'

    Pelosi labeled Chavez a "thug" here.

    Next, we'll see Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Ted Kennedy going to give George Bush a foot massage.

    On a serious note, though, thank goodness we're not so divided we can still stand up to these "leaders."
  8. Espaldapalabras Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 25, 2005
    star 5
    It is too bad Bush didn't really leave "sulfur" at the podium, in the form of an IED. The fact Chavez isn't dead is reason enough why we aren't as evil as he is. What is worse than his comments is the fact that the "diplomats" actually applauded. It is at times like this the Alien and Sedition acts seem like good ideas.
  9. heels1785 SWC Jedi Draft Commissioner

    Game Host
    Member Since:
    Dec 10, 2003
    star 6
    Honestly, I hope he gets the hell out right now, and he can take the worthless joke of a UN with him, right to Venezuela like he wants to.
  10. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    Esp
    It is too bad Bush didn't really leave "sulfur" at the podium, in the form of an IED

    [face_laugh]

    [face_flag]
  11. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    Ah, the ugly, petulant side of America - flag waving, chest thumping nationalists flailing against something they vaguely understand.

    Chavez may be a cad, but frankly the philistine reaction of people here is equally as appalling.

    Shane, I'm especially disappointed.

    E_S
  12. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    Oh stop it Ender. Esp's comment was funny.

    Should I add the [face_cowboy] smilie too?

    Lighten up.
  13. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    I prefer the monkey, and better humour from you.

    :p

    E_S
  14. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez took his verbal battle with the United States to the floor of the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday, calling President Bush "the devil." "The devil came here yesterday," Chavez said. "He came here talking as if he were the owner of the world."

    Seriously.......this Chavez guy needs to stop insulting the devil like that [face_laugh]
  15. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    I'm going to side with Daily Kos:

    Idiot Press

    I just got a call from an MSNBC booker. She wanted to know if I wanted to go on the air to talk about Hugo Chavez. Apparently, he went off on some rant at the UN.

    I said, "Why would I? Who cares about Hugo Chavez?"

    The booker said, "well, it's all over talk radio and the blogs." Talk radio, of course, being Rush Limbaugh and company. The blogs, of course, being the wingnutosphere, happily promoting the latest Horrible Dictator Who Says Mean Things About Bush (unlike the ones in the Middle East, Uzbekistan, and Pakistan who are our "allies").

    I said, "Well, this is a stupid topic. It means nothing. I am focused on things that actually matter to us."

    "Is there another liberal blogger who is writing about it?"

    "No. We're all focused on important things."

    She was incredulous -- "Really?"

    "Really. Do you actually think this is important?" I asked, suddenly incredulous myself.

    "I don't have time to talk about this," she sniffed.

    I'm on the road, so perhaps I had missed some outpouring of pro-Chavez blogging on the left. But a look at my RSS reader doesn't show much of anything, and I've got about 80 blogs on it. The feeds don't always update regularly, so perhaps something was missed.

    But really, this is much ado about nothing. So Chavez said mean things about Bush. Bush and his administration has said mean things about Chavez and about lots of other world leaders.

    Who gives a **** what Venezuela thinks about the United States? I swear, for a country that goes around invading countries it doesn't like, it sure has a thin skin. Republicans, Democrats, and the media are all freaking out.

    Because the president of ****ing
    Venezuela doesn't like Bush.

    Sigh...



    I'd link to the entry but I'm pretty sure that the JC has some rule about a link having foul language in it.
  16. Espaldapalabras Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 25, 2005
    star 5
    Well somebody is a little cranky. I don't deny I wouldn't mind a world without Chavez, but its not like the leftists need any more martyrs. Assassinating world leaders, even if they do come to your country and exercise rights they don't grant their own people to make stupid remarks about your leader, is a bad idea.

    As much as he is an idiot, as long as he keeps selling us oil we can ignore the crap that comes out of his mouth.
  17. ShaneP Ex-Mod Officio

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    FID, it does get a little old hearing the neocons and their GOP robots trot out their "Dictator of the Week" rants.

    First it was Saddam....then Kim Jong...then Ahmadmanwantsjihad...now Chavez.

    Ahh shut up already! You guys got one war out of Iraq so stop trying to sell another one.

  18. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    Unfortunately, idiots are a by-product of democracy. But it's not like we have any reason to bother invading Venezuela. Saddam had his WMD's (well, at least we thought he did) but Chavez has nothing but a bunch of hot air.
  19. Espaldapalabras Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 25, 2005
    star 5
    Who said anything about invading? We just need a good old fashioned CIA coup/assassination. But I have a sneaking suspicion that we already tried that. ;)
  20. Souderwan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 3, 2005
    star 6
    You know, J-Rod, Do you actually know anybody from Harlem? I do. I know 6 people who live there, none of which are lazy, infirmed, or educated. One of them (a lawyer), has more brains in his left pinky than you seem to have in your entire body. Can you please try to make a point? If you can't do that, can you at least make an effort to post some evidence to support your position? It's to the point where this is becoming less and less fun everytime I see a post of yours in a thread.

    let's watch the personalizations, please

  21. J-Rod Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2004
    star 5
    Look, buddy, don't bother getting all bent outta shape simply because I refuse to ignore the obvious for the sake of political correctness. We both know that Chavez choose Harlem because it has a large population and a large percentage of that population is and has been for generations nursing off the breast of the government.

    That's a fact. I grew up in a small farming town of 718 people in Minnesota. While it is a small population, a large percentage of that population was also living off of government instead of work. But that wouldn't have the same impact if Chavez went there to peddle his failed economic ideals as opposed to a huge city.

    Hell, I myself was raised on welfare by a mother who was, shall we say...less than motivated. "It's easier to sit home rather than work" was a phrase I heard her say many times.

    BTW: She is completely charmed by Chevez.
  22. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    Look, buddy, don't bother getting all bent outta shape simply because I refuse to ignore the obvious for the sake of political correctness.

    You're not being politically incorrect. You're being politically ignorant. Socially as well. Have you ever been to Harlem? And before you ask, "Have you?" I'm not the one making comments about a place I've never been. So, no, he's not getting bent out of shape for your 'political incorrectness' he's getting bent out of shape because of your ignorant comments. Being politically incorrect isn't about how many offensive comments you make. It's about speaking your mind and not being an ass about it.
  23. Ender Sai Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 18, 2001
    star 8
    J-Rod,

    Souderwan was trying to tell you about generalisations. These are things you rely on heavily because they're easier than making real arguments and require less "upstairs time". Now, it wasn't nice of him to call you stupid and I'm going to remove that from his post, but he's got a point. Generalisations are never a good thing, and instead of going, "fair enough" and amending your statement, you insist it's right and keep going, full steam ahead what-ho.

    To give you an analogy to illustrate how many of us find that behavior - it's like backing over some kid and instead of going "oh god what have I done", you insist that the kid shouldn't have been playing on the sidewalk in the first place, lousy kids ruining America with their sidewalk playing... I fought and died in three world wars so I could enjoy the freedoms God personally gave America with His own right hand and that includes driving on sidewalks!

    There's a time for humility.

    E_S
  24. Souderwan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 3, 2005
    star 6
    My apologies to all (including you, J-Rod. I shouldn't have suggested that you're not intelligent. I should have pointed out, as the others did, that what you posted was ignorant.

    I understand the generalizations that you make but they are nothing more than rash generalizations. It's just that I've grown weary of posts like the one you made. It's frustrating to see posts that make sweeping comments with no evidence to support them, especially when friends of mine are swept up in those generalizations. If you really think that Harlem is made up entirely (or even mostly) of "lazy, infirmed, and uneducated people," then please go do the research and post it. Otherwise, every credible point you have to make gets lost.

    Case in point: You seemed to be trying to express your irritation at Chavez's comments. I happen to share that irritation. But somehow, you took that opportunity to bash the U.N. (I agree the U.N. has problems but are you going to blame them for what the leader of a nation says there?) and the people of Harlem because he chose to go there. This isn't about being politially correct. It's about being astute in your observations and precise in your language. Your post was neither of these. I selected the least accurate part of your post to draw your attention to this. I did so poorly. Again, for that, I apologize.

  25. J-Rod Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2004
    star 5
    I am sorry. My initial post in this round of debate did, indeed, sound as if I had meant that most of Harlem is living off the government. My second post should have cleared that up a little bit. I stated that Harlem "has a large population and a large percentage of that population is and has been for generations nursing off the breast of the government."

    Some how this came into dispute. While recent numbers are hard to find, we do know that as of 2000 Harlem had twice the unemployment of the US as a whole. Central and East Harlem has high school drop out rates of one third and one half, respectively. And the poverty rate is triple the US average. And let's not even begin to talk about public housing.

    Bottom line is this: Central and East Harlem have 14% and 26.8% of their respective populations receiving public assistance. That is a large percentage of people nursing off of the breast of the government.

    I hope that if I happen to mention that Duluth, Minnesota has a large percentage of cold days I don't have to support that comment too... ;)

    Seriously, I never meant for any personal offences. Again I apologize.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.