Evil Americans

[-dead-]

Originally posted by Rude
Hey Mr. Dead.....many of us don't care what you think. It's not our responsibility to suck you hind tit or anyone elses....the measurement in only hard currency of our support over time is convenient to your cause, but lacks the telling of the whole story.

It's continued statements from folks like you that make some Americans wish our cash contribution could be offered in the form of our boot in your mouth.

I wish I had the big button....I'de clean this town up and send all of you whiney foreigners to some other bbs. I can respect the opinions of my fellow countrymen even if I don't agree with them...you however, haven't earned the right to stand in judgement over me and mine.

Joy! - I always love how delicious ironic it is that the people on this BBS who claim not to care what "foreigners" think about the US always seem to get so upset about what us "foreigners" post.
 
Love the last para - decent christian sentiments those - I can see you're really all for peace and love for all races colours and creeds. I especially savour the hypocrisy of the sentiment that while I have "not earned the right to stand in judgement" over you and yours, you appear to be standing in judgement over me. Quite how you earned that right in your internal ethics system, I am unsure. Still I'm sure it's all quite logical. BTW you seem to have some froth around your mouth there.

And what caused all this invective, pray tell? The fell and judgemental suggestion that perhaps paying 22% of the annual budget of the New York City Board of Education to serve your country's own interests by being a UN member probably wasn't really much to whine over? Or was it was it my sinful implication that the US was not really being picked upon when it was threatened with losing its vote in the General Assembly when it got into arrears with the UN? Or was it the evil and cantankerous thought that having a veto and a permanent seat on the Security Council wasn't bad as far as representation in the UN went?
Of course - I'm forgetting - you don't care do you?

[-dead-]

Originally posted by Krusher
As of the year 2000 1 out of 4 UN memebers paid no dues.
45 states that have temporarily lost their right to vote in the General Assembly because they owe more than 2 years' worth of dues. In 1999 the International court (rebuking the US BTW) called failure to pay dues a violation of international law. Even though the US had actually paid 1.6 billion with the majority of money they owed being for peackeeping duties. The US supplied most of the Equipment and transportation fees for UN peace keepers but refused to pay any more until the UN reformed its finances. Basicly the UN was told quit wasting our money. BTW the International court failed to mention the other 50+ UN members that paid NO dues.

In 2003 the UN started sesion with only  10 members paying full dues. Why should the US be any different. Better yet why should we continue to pay money to a useless orginaization.

Err that was my point - the US isn't any different. The US is a member of the UN and therefore has to pay to have a vote. No money=no voting. No matter who you are. You appear to be arguing against yourself now - originally you posited that it was only the US that was threatened and that no other country had to suffer these idignities:

Fact some countries routinely pay nothing.. that's right nothing in dues. Under UN rules a country that forfeits its dues is not supposed to be able to vote. Name one country other than the USA that has either had its vote cut off or has been threatened with it? For the last few years the UN has threatened (LOL) to cut off the US vote not because they didn't pay dues, but because they have not been paying the full amount for peace keeping missions.

And I refuted that by naming 3 countries and pointing out that 26 in total couldn't vote in the GA in 1998. I also invited you to name one of the countries that you implied routinely pays nothing but still has a vote. I'm still waiting for that. And now you tell me "45 states that have temporarily lost their right to vote in the General Assembly because they owe more than 2 years' worth of dues." What's your point? That the US should not be treated any different or that it should be?

I see you fail to mention that the dastardly "rebuke of the US" from the International Court of Justice was delivered by its president, Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, who is - you guessed it - from the US. Quite how anyone, save for the desparately paranoid, can interpret his statement as a rebuke of the US is beyond me:
 

The financial resources of the Court cannot be divorced from those of the Organization that provides them. The financial fabric of the United Nations must be repaired, most fundamentally by renewed performance of the treaty obligations of the Members of the United Nations to pay the assessments upon them, as determined by this General Assembly in the exercise of the authority deliberately and expressly entrusted to it by the terms of the Charter. The binding character of those assessments was affirmed by the Court in 1962, when it held that "the exercise of the power of apportionment creates the obligation, specifically stated in Article 17, paragraph 2, of each Member to bear that part of the expenses which is apportioned to it by the General Assembly". Failure to meet that obligation not only has the gravest effects on the life of the Organization; it transgresses the principles of free consent and good faith and pacta sunt servanda which are at the heart of international law and relations.

So in fact he not only "failed to mention the other 50+ UN members that paid NO dues", he singularly failed to mention the US too.

You'll also note he doesn't say it's a violation of international law it just transgresses the principals of free consent and good faith and pacta sunt servanda (ie countries should be bound by the treaties they sign) which are at the heart of it.

As to the "We paid our dues, just not the peacekeeping" defence well just look at article 19 again:

A Member of the United Nations which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Organization shall have no vote in the General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The General Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a Member to vote if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the Member.

Not its dues or its membership fees but its financial contributions.

Your assertion that "the US supplied most of the Equipment and transportation fees for UN peace keepers" may or may not be true (I suspect not, certainly as far as equipment goes), but the point is somewhat academic - because the UN pays the countries that provide these sorts of services.

That the UN needs financial reform is uncontestable - for one it has a lot of debts and arrears - mostly due to members not paying their dues - so I fear this may not be the best reason to stop paying. As to Helms-Biden - mostly the UN was told to stop charging the US so much and conceed a few things the US wanted. But there were budget oversight measures demanded - albeit in the third year. Here's a good summary, but the budget reform stuff is basically:
• Adoption of budget procedures that preclude increases to budgets approved by General Assembly unless agreed to by consensus; breakdowns of personnel, travel, equipment required;
• Requirement of continuing evaluation of programs at the UN, ILO, FAO and WHO; and adoption of termination dates for new programs created by General Assembly;
• Requirement that the US have a permanent seat on the UN's Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) or that the five largest contributors be given such seats;
• Establishment of procedures allowing the US General Accounting Office (GAO) to examine UN financial data;
• Appointment of staff on basis of merit; establishment of staff code of conduct binding on all UN personnel and including financial disclosure and rules against nepotism; implementation of personnel evaluation system, including verification of payroll to determine total staffing and comparisons with US civil service; recommends reductions in UN allowances from those in effect on 1 January 1998;
• Adoption of budget procedures for the ILO, FAO, and WHO that preclude increases to budgets approved by member states of the organization unless agreed to by consensus; breakdowns of personnel, travel, equipment required.

All of these measures are certainly fine by me, and I should imagine (and hope) most reasonable people in the world. It could no doubt do with going further. Helms-biden as a whole does rather go against your previous assertion that the US has no representation for its money, though.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Cut em off..thats the meat of the post.  Keep the money for our own people that need it.

That's pretty obvious for you and I Rude...we aren't evil by any means...someone gets it finally.

Rip, do you honestly think you are fooling anybody?


Rip starts thread.

Premise of thread is destroyed.

Rip tries deparately to argrue the premise.

His argruements are quickly rebutted.

Someone comes in with an alternet view on the situation.

Rip says some variation of "See that's what I ment all along."

People shake their heads saddly.

Rinse, repeat.



Rude,

 if you don't want to hear what foreigners have to say about the US, put them on ignore.

You're insults and vitriol piss me off.  But I choose not to squelch you.  And I choose to read them.  No one has a gun to your head.

[midnight Target]

Rip -

Perhaps it is time to get out of the U.N. and give the tax savings back to American workers who are having to skimp and sacrifice to pay their taxes.

Rip -

I couldn't agree more! Cut off the aid to the countries listed, why not? What are they going to do...vote against us on every resolution? THEY ALREADY ARE!

Rip -

I say vote with our tax dollars! Pull it all back, and take care of our own. Screw those guys.

Rip -

Cut em off..thats the meat of the post. Keep the money for our own people that need it.

RUDE -

The monies given have nothing to do with UN votes or politics. ...snip.....not as warm and fuzzy as some might have thought, but still very necessary.

Rip - Yea... thats what I've been saying!!!!!

ROFL!

[Tumor]

Originally posted by Thrawn

 if you don't want to hear what foreigners have to say about the US, put them on ignore.

You're insults and vitriol piss me off.  But I choose not to squelch you.  And I choose to read them.  No one has a gun to your head.

If the vast majority of "foreigners" had anything good to say abou the U.S., we probably wouldn't need a squelch list to begin with.

"You all" being the "Foreigners" expect "us" being the U.S., to sit around on our hands while you give nothing but grief?  You've got to be kidding!  Everyone hates the U.S. for whatever reason... I don't really care.  We have our problems, we screw up, we are far from perfect... I'd challenge a representative of ANY OTHER NATION to make a claim otherwise. Honestly, I'd rather be your friend, but if all my friend does is spout off about how terrible "we" are... then eventually I'm gonna bite back.  Sure, we have folks who start up B.S. on occasion too, but I've come to realize that around HERE, it's not about who's right or who's wrong, or even about who's indifferent,  it's all about us(the rest of the world) against them (the U.S.).  A great big dick-measuring contest that becomes rather comical when you finally realize the only good thing that will ever happen as far as you people are concerned  is the complete downfall and destruction the United "Great Satan" States.

Well dream on "anti-americans".... we're going to be here for a long time.  You won't see us grovel and beg your mercy in YOUR lifetime.

[Ripsnort]

Thrawn, MT, its obvious that you're very envious of me. Please stop...its noticable to everyone but you  guys!

(Incidently, cutting those countries off, how fast WOULD WE be labeled evil? Faster than we already are! LOL! No respect for the big guy on the block, none, 0, zilch..)

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Tumor
Well dream on "anti-americans".... we're going to be here for a long time.  You won't see us grovel and beg your mercy in YOUR lifetime.

Oh my!  You big, strong, warrior of the BBS, go forth and slay the heathen anti-american poster with your amazing typing skills.

LMAO!!

[Torque]

Takes a licking and keeps on ticking, i don't think the man knows when to stay down, go easy on him Dead he ain't all there.

[_Schadenfreude_]

Bitter after being snubbed for membership in the "Axis of Evil,"
  Libya, China, and Syria today announced they had formed the "Axis of
  Just as Evil," which they said would be way eviler than
  that stupid Iran-Iraq-North Korea axis President Bush warned of his
  State of the Union address.

  Axis of Evil members, however, immediately dismissed the new axis as
  having, for starters, a really dumb name. "Right. They are Just as
  Evil... in their dreams!" declared North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.
  "Everybody knows we're the best evils... best at being evil... we're the
  best."

  Diplomats from Syria denied they were jealous over being excluded,
  although they conceded they did ask if they could join the Axis of
  Evil. "They told us it was full," said Syrian President Bashar
  al-Assad. "An Axis can't have more than three countries," explained
  Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. "This is not my rule, it's tradition.
  In World War II you had Germany, Italy, and Japan in the evil Axis.
  So you can only have three. And a secret handshake. Ours is wicked
  cool."

  THE AXIS PANDEMIC

  International reaction to Bush's Axis of Evil declaration was swift,
  as within minutes, France surrendered.

  Elsewhere, peer-conscious nations rushed to gain triumvirate status
  in what became a game of geopolitical chairs. Cuba, Sudan, and Serbia
  said they had formed the Axis of Somewhat Evil, forcing Somalia to
  join with Uganda and Myanmar in the Axis of Occasionally Evil, while
  Bulgaria,
  Indonesia and Russia established the Axis of Not So Much Evil Really
  As Just Generally Disagreeable.
  With the criteria suddenly expanded and all the desirable clubs
  filling up, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, and Rwanda applied to be
  called the Axis of Countries That Aren't the Worst But Certainly
  Won't Be Asked to Host the Olympics; Canada, Mexico, and Australia
  formed the Axis of Nations
  That Are Actually Quite Nice But Secretly Have Nasty Thoughts About
  America, while Spain, Scotland, and New Zealand established the Axis
  of Countries That Be Allowed to Ask Sheep to Wear Lipstick.

  "That's not a threat, really, just something we like to do," said
  Scottish Executive First Minister Jack McConnell. While wondering if
  the other nations of the world weren't perhaps making fun of him, a
  cautious Bush granted approval for most axes, although he rejected
  the establishment of the Axis of Countries Whose Names End in "Guay,"
  accusing one of its members of filing a false application.
  Officials from Paraguay, Uruguay, and Chadguay denied the charges.
  Israel, meanwhile, insisted it didn't want to join any Axis, but
  privately, world leaders said that's only because no one asked them.

[Rude]

Originally posted by GScholz
LOL! Rude goes down kicking and screaming like a girl!

It wasn't us whiny foreigners who started this thread ... or the others of the same topic, it was you Ameriwhiners. Sombody call for a waaaambulance, Rude is hurt!

This girl realizes one thing....the level of jealousy displayed by Europe and others is shameful....the idea that we should somehow give up our own way of governing, so that some one world govt. can exist is laughable.

The UN is simply a vehicle to give Europe some balls....without the UN, I believe anatomically, Europe would be the girl.

You guys whine like women and always have....if you don't turn it against the US, you turn it against the flight model of the 190 or the 109....I can't remember a decent word typed towards the US from any of you with the exception of 9/11, and at that it took 3000 of us dying to produce it.

Like I said....if it's that bad, then show some stones and stand on some principle, close your accounts and support your own.

[Rude]

Originally posted by -dead-
Joy! - I always love how delicious ironic it is that the people on this BBS who claim not to care what "foreigners" think about the US always seem to get so upset about what us "foreigners" post.
 
Love the last para - decent christian sentiments those - I can see you're really all for peace and love for all races colours and creeds. I especially savour the hypocrisy of the sentiment that while I have "not earned the right to stand in judgement" over you and yours, you appear to be standing in judgement over me. Quite how you earned that right in your internal ethics system, I am unsure. Still I'm sure it's all quite logical. BTW you seem to have some froth around your mouth there.

And what caused all this invective, pray tell? The fell and judgemental suggestion that perhaps paying 22% of the annual budget of the New York City Board of Education to serve your country's own interests by being a UN member probably wasn't really much to whine over? Or was it was it my sinful implication that the US was not really being picked upon when it was threatened with losing its vote in the General Assembly when it got into arrears with the UN? Or was it the evil and cantankerous thought that having a veto and a permanent seat on the Security Council wasn't bad as far as representation in the UN went?
Of course - I'm forgetting - you don't care do you?

It's not quite froth, however, I was spitting on my monitor alot while typing that post.

As to Christian sentiment? My faith does not prevent me from honesty....what I said I stand by. I don't even know you, it's your attitude that rubs me the wrong way.

It's like this for me.....I love my God, my country and those who belong to her. Even those US citizens who believe the opposite of me, I still respect them and would personally do anything I could to help them if they needed it.

What's interesting to me is that folks like you spew your poison, all while your hands remain outstretched taking everything and anything the US offers. You lack the character to stand up for what you believe in.

I know many Europeans here in the US who are critical of our country, yet they come here, live here, get educated here, work here, raise families here. What's up with that?

If you think we are the great Satan, then at least have the stones to stand your ground based on your principles, or shut up while ya sip the nectar.

[Rude]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Rip, do you honestly think you are fooling anybody?


Rip starts thread.

Premise of thread is destroyed.

Rip tries deparately to argrue the premise.

His argruements are quickly rebutted.

Someone comes in with an alternet view on the situation.

Rip says some variation of "See that's what I ment all along."

People shake their heads saddly.

Rinse, repeat.



Rude,

 if you don't want to hear what foreigners have to say about the US, put them on ignore.

You're insults and vitriol piss me off.  But I choose not to squelch you.  And I choose to read them.  No one has a gun to your head.

Ya know what? You're right. Reading this O'Club is silly....in twelve years of flying these games, I never even glanced at a BBS until a couple of years ago....I wish I never had.

Too many experts here for anything to ever be accomplished....it just is what it is and nothing I say will change any of it.

Sorry if I insulted anyone here....I just have strong feelings about my country....combine that with the fact that I'm a hot head and the result is my mouth sometimes gets ahead of my mind and spirit.

Being a Christian is not easy....perfect I'm not.

I'm stickin to the General Discussion Forum....it's silly enough:)

Later.