I agree Larry. The UN does serve it's purpose. I think that anytime you get that many people with such a disparate set of viewpoints and agenda's to try to agree on anything, it becomes very difficult.
I think what is going on here is just what George Bush and his staff want to happen. It is a common political tactic. To ask for far more that what you really want and settle for the exact thing that you intended to get. Look at it this way. Just recently, at least two Arab countries have called for Saddam to step down. Something that was unthinkable just a couple of months ago. I dont think Dubya wants to send American troops to their deaths just to settle a score. I think he wants the ouster of Saddam, and doesnt care how it happens. -----Original Message----- From: Larry C. Lyons To: CF-Community Sent: 3/4/03 7:25 PM Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy The US has used the security council more often than not. Just look at the full voting record, not bits and pieces that those with an agenda want to show. The security council serves as a good cover for the US. I disagree with the concept of permanent members on the Security Council, and the idea of vetos. At the same time however, the American and Soviet vetos has been very useful to the US and Israel. For instance the US threatened a veto over the creation of Israel - the government at the time fully expected it to be another socialist haven that would support the Soviets. larry >Larry, > >Yes, you're right - but I was referring more to the Security Council end of >things... > >-Ben > > >At 05:18 PM 3/4/03 -0800, you wrote: >>Um lets see, specific help for 3rd world countries in terms of relief >>efforts, refugee housing, public health, education, etc. What about >>peacekeeping? Famine relief? I could go on. >> >>the UN has also materially and directly benefited the US a lot - for >>instance look where most of the UNHCR equipment are purchased. >> >>larry >> >>At 02:03 PM 3/4/2003 -0800, you wrote: >>>What are they (the UN) good for? >>>Not a whole lot IMHO... >>>-Ben >>> >>> >>>At 04:23 PM 3/4/03 -0500, you wrote: >>> >No, what the real question is why has he gotten away with it for 12 >>> >years? The UN is failing...if they can't enforce their own resolutions, >>> >then what the f**k are they good for? >>> > >>> > >>> >~~ >>> >Stephenie Hamilton >>> >Macromedia Certified ColdFusion Professional >>> >CFXHosting >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >-----Original Message----- >>> >From: Ben Braver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 4:03 PM >>> >To: CF-Community >>> >Subject: Re: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy >>> > >>> > >>> >John- >>> > >>> >I'm somewhat surprised to find myself agreeing with you. >>> > >>> >I wonder why after 12 years of Saddam failing to comply, >>> >it's suddenly become time-critical that we make him. >>> > >>> >Or, what's the _real_ agenda?? >>> > >>> >-Ben >>> > >>> >--- >>> >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >>> >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>> >Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release Date: 2/25/2003 >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
