Post #35,006
4/10/02 5:18:19 PM
|
Srebrenica: another reason not to listen to the UN
[link|http://www.nando.net/world/story/353062p-2883295c.html|Why they should just shut up]
Excerpt:
"When we saw the peacekeepers running away from their positions,
then we knew we had to run, too," she said. "Right before the
massacre, I saw one Dutch soldier sitting and crying. It seemed that
he knew what would happen to us. But they failed."
While the report faulted the Dutch military, it said the Dutch
government and the United Nations also were to blame because they
sent the peacekeepers on an ill-prepared, high-risk mission, then
failed to back them up, for example with air power. The
peacekeepers were shackled by orders not to fire unless fired upon.
I say:
Never send a UN peacekeeper to do a man's job.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Truth is that which is the case. Accept no substitutes.
If competence is considered "hubris" then may I and my country always be as "arrogant" as we can possibly manage.
|
Post #35,013
4/10/02 5:31:54 PM
|
Look up who fought the Korean war. Hint: UN.
The Soviet Union learned not to skip Security Council meetings.
Alex
"Never express yourself more clearly than you think." -- Neils Bohr (1885-1962)
|
Post #35,021
4/10/02 6:19:13 PM
|
Not the best example, IMO
The Korean War is not over. They've been living under a cease fire agreement since 1953; not a peace. And it isn't UN troops manning the border; it's ROK and US troops.
Brian Bronson
|
Post #35,036
4/10/02 8:25:55 PM
|
But the North Korean invasion was undone.
You are right it was (and is) primarily US and ROK. But, when it was a hot war the UN Command (UNC) consisted of 16 countries: The UNC combatants included Australia, Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the [link|http://www.geocities.com/peftok/Oneofthefirst.html|Philippines], South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. Excluding the United States and the ROK, casualties among the 15 other UNC combatants totaled over 3,000 killed in action and close to 14,000 wounded and missing in action. Alex
"Never express yourself more clearly than you think." -- Neils Bohr (1885-1962)
|
Post #35,039
4/10/02 8:59:37 PM
|
Yup. But it isn't over because nobody 'won' the war
BTW, wasn't attempting to belittle or ignore the contributions of all the countries that fought on the UN side. I was just referring to the situation since the cease fire.
Peacekeepers under the UN aren't allowed to win anything; just maintain the status quo. And because Korea was a UN operation, nothing was ultimately decided, for good or bad.
Brian Bronson
|
Post #35,027
4/10/02 6:45:16 PM
|
"Peacekeepers" don't work.
You're either military or cops.
If you're military, you kill people and break things.
If you're cops, you investigate, arrest and prosecute.
Do NOT get these two occupations confused.
The military can NOT keep the peace.
Cops can NOT fight a war.
Once again, this isn't about the UN. This is about what happens when people and governments try to "label" situations incorrectly to soothe their constituents.
|
Post #35,124
4/11/02 12:48:09 PM
|
Of course it's about the UN.
It's about their distressing tendency to mislabel everything.
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html]
Truth is that which is the case. Accept no substitutes.
If competence is considered "hubris" then may I and my country always be as "arrogant" as we can possibly manage.
|
Post #35,134
4/11/02 1:28:10 PM
|
You mean, like 'Liberal' & 'Conservative' n'stuff?
|
Post #35,142
4/11/02 2:11:30 PM
|
Check your facts.
The US does NOT have to follow ANY UN mandates.
We've not followed enough of them in the past.
Hell, we weren't even paying our dues.
If the UN says that we need to send 20,000 "peacekeepers" to some backwater, we can tell them to go fuck themselves.
We don't do this because we like the illusion that we're "doing something" for the world.
If we had any decent policy, we'd offer to fight wars and provide training for local enforcement and judicial systems.
But the people doing the training wouldn't be military. And the military wouldn't be arresting people.
Multi-faceted
Multi-pronged
But, as I've said before, simple thought does not solve complex problems.
|
Post #35,269
4/12/02 3:59:28 PM
|
Some facts
>>The US does NOT have to follow ANY UN mandates.
The General Assembly
Decisions of the Assembly have no legally binding force for Governments.
This is well recognised. (They do carry the weight of world opinion though).
The Security Council
The Security Council has the power to make mandatory resolutions
which are binding on Governments. It is rare that these occur because
of the veto power enjoyed by the five permanent members. The U.S. has
traditionally clubbed anything it didn't like with its veto power
(including resolutions critical of Israel).
Security Council Resolutions which the US doesn't like get killed procedurally.
They don't have to refuse to follow mandatory resolutions. They can kill anything they want to with the veto before it comes into existence. And they do.
Not saying this is how it should be. Just how it is.
-- William Shatner's Trousers --
|
