What will Bolton Do to/for the UN?

What do you think?? Vote and then argue!! :smiley:

Until we figure out exactly what we want out of the UN, “reform” is a dead letter. We have a schizophrenic attitude toward it - we hate it because it’s too weak, but we’re scared of the black helicopters…

[quote=Philip P]Until we figure out exactly what we want out of the UN, “reform” is a dead letter. We have a schizophrenic attitude toward it - we hate it because it’s too weak, but we’re scared of the black helicopters…
[/quote]

Sorry Philip. We want the UN to practice what is preaches re freedom and human rights, without imposing world their *law *onto sovereign nations. Pressure totalitarian regimes, encourage democratic ones. Be intolerent of those who squash free speech (political or religious) and be tolerant of all races (even Jews!). OPEN THE BOOKS and let us know where their money goes (25% of it comes from you and me). PROTECT the oppressed militarily, rather than exploit them. Any other ideas??

Frankly what I find PATHETIC about the opposition to Bolton is the personal nature of the complaints. No one said he was incapable of doing his job. As a last resort apparently Larry Flynt tried to bring up a 20 year old incident with respect to his first wife as if that mattered. THat he HASN"T exploded at all of the spurious and unsubstantiated comments about him says that he can control his temper…apparently the biggest problem according to his detractors. As if controlling tempermental outbursts was something that most of these Senators are known for!

The UN seems to be incredibly ineffective in areas where they might well be useful (coordinated human aid efforts) and incredible corrupt in attempts to enforce sanctions and ‘keep the peace.’ I still say gut the place and sell the offices for condos.

LIsa N

[quote=jlw]What do you think?? Vote and then argue!! :smiley:
[/quote]

Heavy-handed never works!
Diplomacy is the only answer.

[quote=lylesolie]Heavy-handed never works!
Diplomacy is the only answer.
[/quote]

Yes, Adolph Hitler would definitely agree with you!
Lisa N

[quote=lylesolie]Heavy-handed never works!
Diplomacy is the only answer.
[/quote]

Right-i-o. How many treaties (in the absense of war, or the threat of it) have led to lasting peace??? :hmmm:

Name them…if you can. I’ll wait.

:whistle:

:yawn:

:sleep:

[quote=jlw]Sorry Philip. We want the UN to practice what is preaches re freedom and human rights, without imposing world their *law *onto sovereign nations. Pressure totalitarian regimes, encourage democratic ones. Be intolerent of those who squash free speech (political or religious) and be tolerant of all races (even Jews!). OPEN THE BOOKS and let us know where their money goes (25% of it comes from you and me). PROTECT the oppressed militarily, rather than exploit them. Any other ideas??
[/quote]

Well, if I can add one more, “UN officials keep their hands out of the cookie jar and not get involved in crooked schems to make money off dictators like Saddam Hussain.”

so it’s irrelevant who goes to the UN.

[quote=Thekla]so it’s irrelevant who goes to the UN.
[/quote]

Lost cause??

While its probably too late to do anything to help that corrupt, confused, and crubling organization, the only thing that could save it is some “tough love” from someone who’s dissatisfied with the way things are currently being run (Syria in charge of nonproliferation, Sudan in charge of human rights, etc…).

Hey Taliesin52 - you from RN?

Bolton would be a bull in a china shop. The Un needs someone who will tell each andeverybody there that they had better straighten out or we will kick the UN out of the US.

[quote=JW10631]Bolton would be a bull in a china shop. The Un needs someone who will tell each andeverybody there that they had better straighten out or we will kick the UN out of the US.
[/quote]

AMEN to that! :slight_smile:

Everything I have heard about him says he is honest and direct. What other type of person would we want to send? He is qualified and I heard today on the news that he will be confirmed.

[quote=Fitz]Everything I have heard about him says he is honest and direct. What other type of person would we want to send? He is qualified and I heard today on the news that he will be confirmed.
[/quote]

I heard he doesn’t dress well :nerd: and at times he <> puts his hands on his hips when he’s disagreeable! :bigyikes:

Heavens to betsy, that is what the UN/eurofiles are up an arms about??

[quote=jlw]I heard he doesn’t dress well :nerd: and at times he <> puts his hands on his hips when he’s disagreeable! :bigyikes:

Heavens to betsy, that is what the UN/eurofiles are up an arms about??
[/quote]

If not dressing well would disqualify someone from public office, then let’s make a list of who should resign! If I weren’t being charitable I would start a list online here to blast the unfit due to poor wardrobe. :rotfl:

[quote=Fitz]If not dressing well would disqualify someone from public office, then let’s make a list of who should resign! If I weren’t being charitable I would start a list online here to blast the unfit due to poor wardrobe. :rotfl:
[/quote]

Well that mustache is QUITE suspicious! That might disqualify him on its own

Lisa N

[quote=Lisa N]Well that mustache is QUITE suspicious! That might disqualify him on its own

Lisa N
[/quote]

I know… I heard FRENCH people wear mustaches!

Honestly, though, the Bolton issue’s not one that really interests me either way. I think the Dems are just desperate to successfully block an appointment - they haven’t had a lot of experience being a minority party and aren’t quite sure what to do.

On the UN, though, I think everyone (everyone acting in good faith, that is) would like to see increased transparency and steps taken to make sure things like the oil-for-food scandal don’t happen anymore. A good question is who is acting in good faith, and who isn’t. Of course there’s the question of totalitarian regimes, but even among leaders such as the US there are factions who hate the UN, including within the Bush administration. For this reason I’m wary of claims that they want to reform it. Then again, some of it may just be talk for the domestic audience - talking the anti-UN talk while seriously working on reform. I guess we’ll see.

but even among leaders such as the US there are factions who hate the UN, including within the Bush administration

Hate is such a strong word. But Do you hate corruption?? Hate appeasing “bad guys”, while easily criticizing the “good guys”?? Hate waste and bureaucracy for bureaucracy’s sake?? Hate all talk-no action?? Hate credit-taking bureaucrats who arrive after the work has been finished?? Hate anti-semitism?? Hate meetings to set up more meetings??? Hate conference calls designed to tell us what we already know??? Hate people telling you how to fix what ain’t broke??

I don’t think they hate the UN, I think they hate what the UN has become.

[quote=Philip P]On the UN, though, I think everyone (everyone acting in good faith, that is) would like to see increased transparency and steps taken to make sure things like the oil-for-food scandal don’t happen anymore. A good question is who is acting in good faith, and who isn’t. Of course there’s the question of totalitarian regimes, but even among leaders such as the US there are factions who hate the UN, including within the Bush administration. For this reason I’m wary of claims that they want to reform it. Then again, some of it may just be talk for the domestic audience - talking the anti-UN talk while seriously working on reform. I guess we’ll see.
[/quote]

If you’re wary of reform, then you’re stuck with repeats of the oil-for-food scandal, anti-semitism, and totalitiarian regimes.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.