Author Topic: Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?  (Read 3591 times)

Offline StSanta

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2496
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #45 on: October 22, 2001, 02:32:00 PM »
Gentlemen.

The UN is the whole organisation, from the foot soldier to Koffi Annan.

The job as a UN soldier is tough - stationed away from your loved ones, in hostile territory, with very ambigious orders. They're peace *keepers*, not peace *makers*. This is an important differentiation to make.

Aye, the organisation has had major failures - as has the US military. But it has also had many successes - UN troops have been deplyed in many countries and helped preserve a fragile peace.

When you're saying that the UN is worthless, you're also saying that the job done by the soldier on the ground is worthless. It isn't. You're quite right - it's an inefficient machine with too many cooks - but there can be no other way. Pissed because you got voted off? Welcome to a democratic organisation. My personal belief is this happened because of the US refusal to pay what it owns the UN in financial terms, but that's just my take on the back stabbing politics that go on behind the scene.

Just like you elevate yourselves and your armed forces from that sorta Washington thing, I do. These are my pals who've come home with things they'll have to live with forever - in some cases they haven't come home at all. Fighting for a people they do not know, for a people they have no alliance with. For people with such different cultural values that they're almost incompatible.

The UN piss me off immensely too - the Srebenica disaster is a good example. The Balkans in general - I've heard a good deal of stories of how Danish peace keepers have been ordered to hold fire, despite seeing atrocities and having the firepower to stop it.

Still, my heart goes out to the men and women who have the courage to don a blue hat. When I see a UN soldier, I see s atriving for peace, I see hope for human kind - and, as an atheist, I can assure you that that isn't plentiful.

Don't diss the blue helmet, and I won't diss your military. Critizise it all you want, but don't diss it.

<out>

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #46 on: October 22, 2001, 02:43:00 PM »
Santa..

I sympathize with your strong feelings regarding the UN.. sadly; time and again, the UN has left it's peacekeepers with a mission that cannot be accomplised with the forces allocated to it. Without proper air and armor support, without competent on the scene leadership and with an incredible ROE that is simply not implementable it's a recipie for disaster... for the troops on that noble cause, and for the folks they are supposed to be protecting.

You'll find most US soldiers exceptionally anti-UN because the UN has a long history of abandoning its mission, and its troops, in the field.

A better discussion might be "What can the member nations do to make the UN's Security Council less of a laughing stock to the worlds Criminal Regimes?"
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Udie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3395
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #47 on: October 22, 2001, 02:55:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by StSanta:

Pissed because you got voted off? Welcome to a democratic organisation. My personal belief is this happened because of the US refusal to pay what it owns the UN in financial terms, but that's just my take on the back stabbing politics that go on behind the scene.
<out>

 The vote wasn't the thing that got us (me) pissed.  It was the countries that took our place.  I can't remember the list right now, but it was unimaginable to me that any of them would be on the human rights commitee.  What good is an organization if all the evil countries can just out vote the good ones?

 I've got lot's of respect for what the soldiers do.  They go protect the weak from evil tyrants, that's a good thing.  It's just that I and many here in the USA believe that the UN is one of the biggest tyrants of them all.  Sure some good has been done, but from what I can remember it was NATO countries doing all the good.

 Now if the UN is pissed because the US suposedly ows it money. hmmm what about all the war debts to the USA?  How bout all the TRILLIONS of dollars we have forked out over the past 60 yrs around the world?  You do know that American citizens work for that money right? Some actually slave for it. For what?  to be hated? To have people fly planes into our building and kill our people?  From my stand point that makes me want to say diddly the world.  Maybe the USA should just sit on the sidelines for the next 1/2 a century and watch the world kill itself or starve to death.  Thank God we dont'....


 Nothing personal to you santa  :) not trying to start a fight. I hope you get the point that I respect the soldiers, just not the organization....

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #48 on: October 22, 2001, 03:03:00 PM »
Santa:

I dont think highly of the UN soldiers because I dont belive they give a damn to voluntarily risk their lives and actually try defending the people. Im sure you have heard what happend in Srebrenica. The fully armed Dutch bluehelmets just stood by as a Serb army walked into the "safe area", made a selection and took the men/boys away in busses. That makes me distrust the UN soldier, I will forever distrust their value and wilingness to sacrifice their lives in defense of others untill I see it. They have mostly proved useless in africa as well. What should be said of the French or Belgian UN people who just ran away and let 1000s of poeople get slaughtered in the walled UN compound during the Rwanda genocide. Or how about Sierra Leone where 500 UN bluehelmets were taken as hostages by the attacking side. How useless were they? It was only after Nigerian army and South African mercs came in that any peace was restored.

The UN soldier, in my opinion, is nothing but a fancy international rent-a-cop with no devotion to his work. I will hold this opinion until I see or am shown different.

Plus we all know that when the UN is really serious about somethinbg its always the USA military that actually does the greatest part or at least the most significant/difficult role.


With all due respect to those who disagree, I just dont trust them to do their jobs.

Sorry.

Offline mietla

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2276
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #49 on: October 22, 2001, 03:16:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
I want all people who who support any form of communism, and that includes their studmuffingot leftist socialist pinko anti-capitalist lackeys to eat toejam and die.

A difference between an optimist and a pessymist in communism.

An optimist:
If the things keep going the way they do now, pretty soon we'll all have to eat our own toejam.

A pessymist:
Yeah, but ther will be enough for everybody?

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: mietla ]

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #50 on: October 22, 2001, 04:22:00 PM »
Quote
I dont think highly of the UN soldiers because I dont belive they give a damn to voluntarily risk their lives and actually try defending the people.

The UN soldier, in my opinion, is nothing but a fancy international rent-a-cop with no devotion to his work. I will hold this opinion until I see or am shown different.

You hold the American forces in such a high regard, vehemently defend them when criticized yet pour scorn on those from any other country.

I'm sure British forces just loved watching a bunch of barbarians butcher each other before their eyes knowing they were powerless to do anything about it.

I'm sure they've got some outstanding stories to tell their grand-children.

If criticism has to be levelled at any part of the UN, the last place to aim is the troops on the ground. They do an impossible job in impossible circumstances.

I agree with Santa and hold them in the highest possible regard.
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #51 on: October 22, 2001, 04:47:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
[QB]With all due respect to those who disagree, I just dont trust them to do their jobs.QB]

That's probably because you just don't know wtf you're talking about.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #52 on: October 22, 2001, 04:51:00 PM »
As far as only muslims being able to 'handle; muslims.  UN Peacekeepers have had successful missions in Egypt, Cyprus and the Golan Heights.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #53 on: October 22, 2001, 05:47:00 PM »
I dont trust them, thats a personal opinion its not a metter of fact.

Prove to me that I dont not trust them....

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #54 on: October 22, 2001, 05:56:00 PM »
why did the UN bluehelmets at Srebrenica just stand around? Why were they not willing to risk putting up opposition to the serb army who just came into the town? Why did they just stand by and let them make a selection of men/boys? why did they let them take these men away on busses?

BTW if you even hint that the UN guys in Srebrenica didnt know what was to happend to these men you just prove my point of their incompetance.

Whatever the reasons, be they high level political or lack of resolve in the bluehelmets the UN armed forces is just an impotent force that has no real use except as fancy rent-a-cops.

And im not going around prasing the US military, I am however saying the obvious truth. The UN cant do squat in any serious manner and must often call on US Military direct intervention.


Once again, I dont trust UN bluehelmets. And the UN politicans even less.

PS. I have nop hatred for the individual UN person or UN soldier. I just dont trust the "bluehelmets" as an overall force.

Offline Hobodog

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
      • http://www.military.com
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #55 on: October 22, 2001, 06:18:00 PM »
I propose that all members of NATO shall withdraw from the UN immediatly! Lets saee how well the UN fairs without US money. I mean we pay more than half the dues.

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Hobodog ]

Offline Dogger

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #56 on: October 22, 2001, 07:49:00 PM »
Actually I'm all for moving the whole stinking UN out of the USA to Switzerland.

Offline Thrawn

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6972
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #57 on: October 22, 2001, 08:07:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
I dont trust them, thats a personal opinion its not a metter of fact.

Prove to me that I dont not trust them....

I'm not trying to prove that you don't trust them.  I'm saying your opion means crap, because you don't know wtf your talking about and your opion is an uniformed one.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #58 on: October 22, 2001, 08:22:00 PM »
'The UN soldier, in my opinion, is nothing but a fancy international rent-a-cop with no devotion to his work. I will hold this opinion until I see or am shown different.

"
your observation says more about yourself and your hatreds then it does about those of us who have served the UN.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Why wasn't the UN involved in the decision to attack Afghanistan?
« Reply #59 on: October 22, 2001, 08:27:00 PM »
The UN isnot involved in this cause the US wants it to have a chance to succeed. You might as well include the IOC as the UN.