American unpaid UN dues

[Rogueboys]

just a question but how many people know that the Americans have not paid their UN dues? which is a couple of billion dollars, now if it was 1 year behind no reason to complain but americans have not paid their dues in a couple of years and on top of that they went to Iraq when the UN expressively forbade it than they ask the countries of the UN to help pay their war debt, in my opinion the Bush administration slapped the UN took a healthy shit on them and that asked to pass the toilet paper, what are ur opinions on this?

[Demosthenez]

Source?

[Memorize]

The UN can kiss my white american ass.

[Redbob86]

What has the UN done for us lately? How often does America get it's foreign debt repayed? Most of the time, countries don't pay us back, consider this even.

[Altarus]

At 10/1/05 12:45 AM, Rogueboys wrote: just a question but how many people know that the Americans have not paid their UN dues? which is a couple of billion dollars, now if it was 1 year behind no reason to complain but americans have not paid their dues in a couple of years and on top of that they went to Iraq when the UN expressively forbade it than they ask the countries of the UN to help pay their war debt, in my opinion the Bush administration slapped the UN took a healthy shit on them and that asked to pass the toilet paper, what are ur opinions on this?

The UN is irrelevant. They are nothing but a massive international bureaucracy.

The UN's failure to act on security issues includes

* Failure to act during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, when current Secretary General Kofi Annan oversaw peacekeeping forces there.

* Failure by MONUC (UNSC Resolution 1291) to effectively intervene during the Second Congo War, which claimed nearly five million people in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 1998-2002 (with fighting reportedly continuing), and in carying out and distributing humanitarian relief.

*Failure to intervene during 1995 killings in Srebrenica, despite the fact that the UN designated it a "Safe Haven" for refugees and assigned 600 Dutch peacekeepers to protect it.

* Failure to successfully deliver food to starving citizens of Somalia; the food was usually seized by local warlords instead of reaching those who needed it. A US/UN attempt to apprehend the warlords seizing these shipments resulted in the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu.
(Source: Wikipedia)

* Failure to enforce UN resolutions on Iraq's illegal weapons.

They have Sudan, Cuba, and Libya on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which all have utterly dismal records on human rights. Then there is the oil for food scandal. Plus, they tend to be anti-American, and America pays 22% of the total budget! The list goes on and on. Just forget about the UN. It's pointless.

[Redbob86]

Isn't the head of the UN's son involved in international drug transporation or something like that?

[fahrenheit]

What are they going to do? Sanction us?

With what army?

[YoYo17]

At 10/1/05 02:08 AM, Velocitom wrote: What are they going to do? Sanction us?

With what army?

real? who the hell are they to tell us what to do with out army, fuck them, they dont do jack, buncha bueracrats.

the UN can kiss my multi cultural of caucasian ancestory (mostly irish and little bit italian) AMERICAN ASS!

[Demosthenez]

At 10/1/05 01:57 AM, Redbob86 wrote: How often does America get it's foreign debt repayed? Most of the time, countries don't pay us back, consider this even.

How often do we pay back our own debts? Cmon, dont be so partisan and petty.

[Redbob86]

At 10/1/05 03:14 AM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 10/1/05 01:57 AM, Redbob86 wrote: How often does America get it's foreign debt repayed? Most of the time, countries don't pay us back, consider this even.

How often do we pay back our own debts? Cmon, dont be so partisan and petty.

What do you mean, partisan? I'm a liberal moderate, forget what my screen name may tell you, I'm not a rep. I just picked that name 10 years ago, and I don't feel like changing it. Red=was favorite color at the time; Bob= my name; 86= Birth Year.

[BurritoClock]

At 10/1/05 12:45 AM, Rogueboys wrote: just a question but how many people know that the Americans have not paid their UN dues?

good.

[Demosthenez]

At 10/1/05 03:29 AM, Redbob86 wrote: What do you mean, partisan?

Nothing I said had anything to do with left and right. It is partisan against the world community. Maybe it was a bad choice of words, but my point still stands.

You cant use the fact some people dont pay us back when we indeed arent to good at paying back our own debts.

[Redbob86]

The UN hasn't done jack. It's all beurocratic. Seriously, what good purpose does it serve these days? It doesn't really get hands on for anything, it only does that if something happens to one of the nations that make up the organization. Most of the problems in the world are happening outside UN nations, and they don't do jack about it.

[Redbob86]

At 10/1/05 03:35 AM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 10/1/05 03:29 AM, Redbob86 wrote: What do you mean, partisan?

Nothing I said had anything to do with left and right. It is partisan against the world community. Maybe it was a bad choice of words, but my point still stands.

You cant use the fact some people dont pay us back when we indeed arent to good at paying back our own debts.

Okay, I understand what you are saying now. Still, the UN has yet to become of great use. Frankly, they have been reduced to nothing more than a good idea, no real progress has been made.

[Demosthenez]

Your right, lets destroy the global community we have been trying to establish for the past 90 years and all it has done because their full of beaurcrats. Yeah.

And it has done nothing? Yeah, the WHO has done jack, except for destroy smallpox and all the other crap its done. And I guess the assisstance they have done worldwide sucks.

Your right, abolish the UN.

[bcdemon]

Supporting the UN and silly little things like the ICC would give the image that the USA supports an international community, as opposed to a 'US-led international communty'. And if the US actually paid its bill to the UN, how could they afford to have bases in 135 of the 192 worldwide states?

[Jose]

At 10/1/05 03:47 AM, FAB0L0US wrote:
Your right, abolish the UN.

Name one good thing the UN has done this year.

[iWalker]

At 10/1/05 01:57 AM, Wyrlum wrote:

:list of "failures"

* Failure to enforce UN resolutions on Iraq's illegal weapons.

They have Sudan, Cuba, and Libya on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which all have utterly dismal records on human rights. Then there is the oil for food scandal. Plus, they tend to be anti-American, and America pays 22% of the total budget! The list goes on and on. Just forget about the UN. It's pointless.

the united states have also dismal records on human rights. the dues are calculated in a fair way. Iraq didn't have WMD. and the oil for food scandal? well what the fuck? the embargo was too tight anyway.

you know the whole attitude of the "un is useless" is a part of why WW II started. " The impetus for the founding of the League came from Democratic U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, but, along with many other countries, the United States never joined the League of Nations.

The League lacked an armed force of its own and so depended on the Great Powers to enforce its resolutions, which they were often very reluctant to do. After a number of notable successes and some early failures, the League ultimately proved incapable of preventing aggression by the fascist Axis Powers in the 1930s." (sou

so if the US would have been in the LN then perhaps the second world war would have been prevented.

[Rogueboys]

lol i guess i posted this thread with nothing but word of mouth which we all know is decieving as hell, and i didnt look at what americans thought of the UN, so basically the UN is good for international research thats about it, and as to Rwanda if i recall ( word of mouth yet again ) there was a canadian general there who tried to commit suicide because he wasnt allowed to help them due to rules of engagement

[JoS]

At 10/1/05 03:36 AM, Redbob86 wrote: The UN hasn't done jack. It's all beurocratic. Seriously, what good purpose does it serve these days? It doesn't really get hands on for anything, it only does that if something happens to one of the nations that make up the organization. Most of the problems in the world are happening outside UN nations, and they don't do jack about it.

The dues are based ont he size of your economy. Yeah you pay 22%, but its because you have the biggest economy. Do you expect Botswana to pay the same dues as the US?

The US is not billions behind. They are only a few year behind, but its still tens of millions of dollars.

Want to know why the UN didnt stop Rwanada. It actually did send troops to Rwanada, a Canadian General headed the mission. The only western countries willing to send troops were Canada and Belgium (the former colonial power). A massive international force cam in for two or threee days, just to evacuate westerners, not to assit in any way stopping the genocide. Its not the UNs fault, its the fault of member nations. The UN tried, Kofi tried, Romeo (the General) tried, but no one would help out. Eventually the US sent a bunch of APC's that didnt work. After the Belgiums lost a dozen or so troops they pulled out. Know who sent the most troops? The all might powerful country of Bangladesh, followed by Ghana. And the funny thing, Rwanada was sitting on the SC at the time.

Don't blame failures on the UN, blame it on bickering nations who refuse to support the UN resolutions, or even bicker and slow them down.

BTW the US STate Department called Romeo up and asked how many of Rwandas people died, they said it would tak eby their calculations 700 000 before it was worth risking the life of one US solider. RISKING.

[Rogueboys]

I also believe racism comes into play on Rwanda that and the fact that theirs nothing of worth in there, for example Saddam Hussein wasnt as bad as Rwanda ( in my opinion ) but as their was no oil and or other valuable natural resources most countries found it profitless to go in. ( i dont think i slammed americans in this one ) 2 points for me

[Jimsween]

The US pays its UN dues, it always does, it just doesn't pay the amount the UN wants it to. The US pays it's percent of the world GDP into UN dues, the UN wants something like 10% more than that.

Also, this is an old old story, which was resolved long ago.

[Rogueboys]

way to ruin the mood jimsween tell us what we're arguing about is no longer valid what kind of debater are u? the only reason y we debate is because we like to hear eachothers voice

this is officially the dumbest post i prolly ever made or at least around there

[Goatpower]

At 10/1/05 03:32 AM, BurritoClock wrote:

At 10/1/05 12:45 AM, Rogueboys wrote: just a question but how many people know that the Americans have not paid their UN dues?

good.

This is just too hot.

BurritoClock is back!

[BurritoClock]

Boo-yah, now help me, who are you... all these damn name changes are making me thristy!

[Samuel-HALL]

At 10/1/05 03:47 AM, FAB0L0US wrote: Your right, lets destroy the global community we have been trying to establish for the past 90 years and all it has done because their full of beaurcrats. Yeah.

I don't think it should be destroyed. They are viable, in certain situations. They handle things that other people (Governments of countries) would have to.
I just don't think America should be, or is obligated to be a part of it.

Your right, abolish the UN.

Nope. Simply allow America (or any country) to break away from it, if it chooses.

[Demosthenez]

At 10/1/05 10:59 AM, -Jose- wrote: Name one good thing the UN has done this year.

Sorry, I didnt know the UN has to do something groundbreaking every year to justify its existence.

At 10/2/05 12:20 AM, _FLAGG wrote: Nope. Simply allow America (or any country) to break away from it, if it chooses.

I have no problem with that. I just dont see how it would be a good example to the world if the most powerful nation got out of it. Its like giving the finger to the world.

[Altarus]

At 10/1/05 11:18 AM, nimmer wrote:

At 10/1/05 01:57 AM, Wyrlum wrote: list of "failures"

* Failure to enforce UN resolutions on Iraq's illegal weapons.

They have Sudan, Cuba, and Libya on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, which all have utterly dismal records on human rights. Then there is the oil for food scandal. Plus, they tend to be anti-American, and America pays 22% of the total budget! The list goes on and on. Just forget about the UN. It's pointless.

the united states have also dismal records on human rights.

The US is reformed, whereas Libya is not. There is no valid comparison.

the dues are calculated in a fair way.

I didn't say they weren't "fair." But I fail to see why the US should pay such a large percentage for something hates them and is ineffective.

Iraq didn't have WMD.

The UN didn't even look for them. They spend a decade passing pointless resolutions which they had no intention of enforcing. And Iraq did have illegal weapons.

you know the whole attitude of the "un is useless" is a part of why WW II started. " The impetus for the founding of the League came from Democratic U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, but, along with many other countries, the United States never joined the League of Nations.

The League lacked an armed force of its own and so depended on the Great Powers to enforce its resolutions, which they were often very reluctant to do. After a number of notable successes and some early failures, the League ultimately proved incapable of preventing aggression by the fascist Axis Powers in the 1930s." (sou

so if the US would have been in the LN then perhaps the second world war would have been prevented.

Yeah right. The LN sounds just like the UN today. Too many resolutions, too much talk, never any action.

[Samuel-HALL]

At 10/2/05 02:13 AM, FAB0L0US wrote:

At 10/2/05 12:20 AM, _FLAGG wrote: Nope. Simply allow America (or any country) to break away from it, if it chooses.

I have no problem with that. I just dont see how it would be a good example to the world if the most powerful nation got out of it. Its like giving the finger to the world.

If we can handle things ourselves (assuming we can and could)...why do we need them? Are they not, more times than not, a detterant to America's goals?

[madzakk]

Awwww! We've been doing most of the bankrolling of that corrupt institution since its inception. Time for the 3rd world slackers to pull their weight!
US out of UN!