Dont let the UN Control US

[MrDad]

Guys the topic is "Dont let the UN Control US", not "lets all point out the mistakes / lies the USA has made, and Soviet political discussions."

 

lets get back on topic, and discuss why the USA should leave the UN.

 

because theyre a crap un member and george bush who is in charge should be shot for goin to war illegally

Who would then cover the 25% of the UN budget that the US currently provides? Who would take up the slack in providing peacekeeping troops and the material and logistics to supply them that the US currently does?

 

Personally, I'd like to see the EU finally come together. It would go a long ways toward easing world fears of US domination. Then we could go back to being one of the world's bad guys instead of the world's only bad guy.

[maverick]

Guys the topic is "Dont let the UN Control US", not "lets all point out the mistakes / lies the USA has made, and Soviet political discussions."

 

lets get back on topic, and discuss why the USA should leave the UN.

 

because theyre a crap un member and george bush who is in charge should be shot for goin to war illegally

Who would then cover the 25% of the UN budget that the US currently provides? Who would take up the slack in providing peacekeeping troops and the material and logistics to supply them that the US currently does?

 

Personally, I'd like to see the EU finally come together. It would go a long ways toward easing world fears of US domination. Then we could go back to being one of the world's bad guys instead of the world's only bad guy.

 

hey that statement gets no arguement from me but it appears that bush is very aware of how much the US pays to the UN and wants to do what he likes.

 

not cool.

 

 

[Dracoons]

so noeone asked them selves why it says US in the topic, im not sure if the UN will ever try to control us we are on tha intarnetweb. that and they like to blabing and cursing to each other in each their own language. if we all learned binary or html it would all be cool

[elbubsio]

Who would then cover the 25% of the UN budget that the US currently provides? Who would take up the slack in providing peacekeeping troops and the material and logistics to supply them that the US currently does?

 

Even if the US (or any other country for that matter) provided 100% of the UNs budget etc, it doesn't give them the right to commit immoral and illegal war crimes. Invading another country and murdering thousands of innocent people for a political agenda is wrong - pure and simple.

 

As for the US leaving the UN, I think personally that would be a huge mistake politically. It would alienate them even more in the world and heighten their image as a 'rogue' country who's willing to arrogantly do ANYTHING it likes in the belief that no-one will do anything about it. Of course, i'm sure that wouldn't bother the US administration, after all what do us other little countries matter against the mighty US :rolleyes:

[MrDad]

Who would then cover the 25% of the UN budget that the US currently provides? Who would take up the slack in providing peacekeeping troops and the material and logistics to supply them that the US currently does?

 

Even if the US (or any other country for that matter) provided 100% of the UNs budget etc, it doesn't give them the right to commit immoral and illegal war crimes. Invading another country and murdering thousands of innocent people for a political agenda is wrong - pure and simple.

 

As for the US leaving the UN, I think personally that would be a huge mistake politically. It would alienate them even more in the world and heighten their image as a 'rogue' country who's willing to arrogantly do ANYTHING it likes in the belief that no-one will do anything about it. Of course, i'm sure that wouldn't bother the US administration, after all what do us other little countries matter against the mighty US :rolleyes:

I see you have strong beliefs but I believe you are inferring far more than I said from this statement. Those are the stakes behind the question of whether the US should withdraw from the UN Charter. I don't mean it as an endorsement nor indictment of the idea.

[maverick]

i have a great idea!

 

why not start an multi nation organisation in which international problems are solved. nations can involve themselves as much as they are able and it will be run by elected officials who are there because they are good at their jobs and they give a crap about stuff.

 

in an organisation like this there would be no favoritism and no one nation would ever completely rule the organisation.

 

if this style of leadership was accepted then im sure that every one of the nations involved would at least attempt to work together in a united fashion to solve the worlds problems.......................

 

 

....i just cant think of a good name for it

[Guest c4evap]

A name? How about "The League Of Nations".

 

:p

 

c4 B)

[GhostShadow]

"The United States Of America does not negotiate with terrorists"

 

.........it only funds them.

 

 

Ah that would be on of those M16 rifles that 'accidentally' found its way there LOL

 

oh out of the countless way that the rifle could have gotten there, you just happen to choose THAT WAY.. Automaticly its The United States of Americas fault that a rifle was found there... b/c god know that America is the only country on his grreat world that makes that specific type of rifle... (and I cant see the image so if you wanna DL it then load it up, it might work out then, dunno).

 

 

[moomini]

i thought the usa was the only country on earth that made the m16.....mite be wrong tho???

[MrDad]

i thought the usa was the only country on earth that made the m16.....mite be wrong tho???

The AR-15 style rifles are made in the USA by at least dozen large companies' date=' such as Armalite, Bushmaster, Colt, FN Manufacturing, Hesse, Les Baer, Olympic, Wilson Combat, and by number of smaller companies, many of which do assembly their rifles from components made by some other major manufacturers. M16-type rifles also manufactured outside of the USA, most notably in the Canada, by Diemaco Co. China also makes some AR-15 type rifles at NORINCO state factories. M16 rifles are used by many foreign military groups, most notably the British SAS, who preferred the M16 over the infamous L85A1 rifle, and by many others.[/quote']

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as18-e.htm

[Varchld]

"The United States Of America does not negotiate with terrorists"

 

.........it only funds them.

 

 

Ah that would be on of those M16 rifles that 'accidentally' found its way there LOL

 

oh out of the countless way that the rifle could have gotten there, you just happen to choose THAT WAY.. Automaticly its The United States of Americas fault that a rifle was found there... b/c god know that America is the only country on his grreat world that makes that specific type of rifle... (and I cant see the image so if you wanna DL it then load it up, it might work out then, dunno).

 

 

 

Didn't think this was the topic, don't think it's matters either.

It's an almighty common asumption (which I can't be bothered varifying) that the usa have sold arms to other countries including those it may later "attack".

 

Anyway, two topics seem to be stated at the start of the thread, the name of the topic (Dont let the UN Control US) and the refusal of one man to obay a direct order, and turn his backs on his brothers in arms.

You might be able to guess what my opinion is on the latter.

 

This soldier enlists, trains and quite possibly fights under the banner of the usa. Then they order his squad into another country. They give the U.N. command authority over the squad. A single member of the squad has an issue with the US uniform which the US have adapted for the current conditions (ie. the blue headwear to signify the troops are sanctioned by the U.N.). He is orderd to wear it, refuses and is discharged by the authority in charge.

It is a US army uniform, seeing as the US is in the U.N. it is the uniform the troops wear when under their command. The U.N. is not a military force, it's a peacekeeping force, you send an army wearing 20 different uniforms into an area to keep the peace, then see how much peace is going to happen. (that's none for those without a clue)

 

 

 

The new issue is whether or not the order is recognised as that of the US military's chain of command or if it was from an illegitimate source.

 

Now isn't it this simple.

The US military command has authority over the troops, the troops being a "child" of the "parent" Army.

The Army is ordered by the section of government which has priority control, to go to this country and follow orders from the U.N. command.

The U.N. is given control over the units sent to them by the Presidential office.

Now here is the point i'm trying to make.

This is a legal action despite having to go through congress etc. because the usa is a part of the U.N. they have recognised them as a qualified authority to command troops which are placed under their control.

 

maybe i've said it wrong, but the loophole which this fella is trying to slip through really is only a matter of wording, that's why he has lost every court appearance he has seen to date (according to what is said on sites mentioned previously in this thread).

 

besides all this is the fact that he is showing a buttload of disrespect to everyone he has ever served with by refusing to wear the same uniform as them. Also creating a huge issue to do with the army as a greater whole.

 

 

 

and now the opinion of me, in association with the us and un

firstly, the us didn't create the un, the name was penned by an american representative, I call some people scumbags, but that does not make then a bag of scum.

Indeed the un was started with much help from the us, but it is quite impossible for an alliance to start with one country. The very meaning requires more then one faction.

 

I'm sure you can tell i've lost a few thoughts on this matter, but i'm not totally spent yet.

 

The purpose of the UN cannot possibly be achieved if it is readily ignored at the whims of member nations. Indeed the principals which the creators intended (all of which the "prime" countires including the US created and agreed) have long since been trampled. Most noticably of which (recently) is that of the USA's actions involving Iraq.

 

 

That said the UN still does much good, There are countless peoples which the forces

under the blue cap have administered medical treatment, provided food, or escorted aid agencies.

 

It is unfortunate that it is not to the profit of those with capitalist ideals, but for those of us whom indeed see the need for an authority greater then the one who has more explosives, or the one whom shows their teeth the most, or them who shout the loudest.

 

 

anyway, I might be more cohesive at a later date, or maybe i'll find a better word then cohesive.

 

crap that's long, sorry.

[GhostShadow]

This soldier enlists, trains and quite possibly fights under the banner of the usa. Then they order his squad into another country. They give the U.N. command authority over the squad. A single member of the squad has an issue with the US uniform which the US have adapted for the current conditions (ie. the blue headwear to signify the troops are sanctioned by the U.N.). He is orderd to wear it, refuses and is discharged by the authority in charge.

It is a US army uniform, seeing as the US is in the U.N. it is the uniform the troops wear when under their command. The U.N. is not a military force, it's a peacekeeping force, you send an army wearing 20 different uniforms into an area to keep the peace, then see how much peace is going to happen. (that's none for those without a clue)

 

bTW, you are right, thanks for putting us on track agian. And the matter at hand is that the UN is copntroling American Troops, hell- not just American Troops but are using troops from around the world as a personalized Schwartz Staffel.

 

If you re-read the early post of mine you will see;

"1st LT (O-2) Harvey Wysong:

 

I swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me God...Anyone who uses the machinery and power of government in violation of the Constitution is a "domestic enemy" of the Constitution."

 

When you are sworn into service that is your creed. You dont swear allignece to the UN. and that is my problem. This is obviously a stupid Topic to create when most ppl here are European or just dont care.

 

SO if a MOD could Lock this or put it in Rura, that would be great. B/c ppl here are not gonna see Eye to Eye and it has already been the source of a lot of problems between ppl on this site. So the MOD's wont get any argument from me if they wanna lock it up, b/c I know that ya'll have wanted to

[MrDad]

You are correct in that US soldiers do not swear allegiance to the UN. That would be a violation of the UCMJ and their oath. They are authorized by their Commander in Chief, the President, and by US law to assist in UN peacekeeping missions and to carry out orders given by the peacekeeping force commander as long as they do not conflict with the Constitution, the UCMJ or the Geneva Conventions. They cannot be ordered to act against the interests or security of the United States. If you are not satisfied with this situation, contact your legislators to change the law.

 

 

[theaveng]

"The United States Of America does not negotiate with terrorists"

 

Ya know I was watching an old TNG episode "The High Ground" where Doctor Crusher is abducted by terrorists. Commander Riker sends a message to the leader: "Tell him the Federation is willing to negotiate for her release."

 

See? That's how an enlightened society acts. They don't treat terrorists as dogs. They treat them as the human beings they are & open up a dialogue/negotiation to SOLVE their differences, rather than spill blood.

 

We should be more like the Federation.

 

 

 

[Neutron]

When you are sworn into service that is your creed. You dont swear allignece to the UN. and that is my problem.

 

But isn't that really the point? The US is part of the UN. The Government of the US has joined this Union, and therefor all US citicens and all US soldiers as well. You don't have to like it, but that how it is right now. So this one soldier clearly violated a command given to him from a functioning chain of command, ending with the President of the US in cooperation with the UN.

 

This is obviously a stupid Topic to create when most ppl here are European or just dont care.

 

Why? I'd think that would be a great reason to continue reading. After all, what we all want most (I hope) is to get along with each other. And to achieve that, listening to each others opinions is the most important part of that.

 

And to clarify a few things. The UN isn't a government. It's a bunch (most of the world) of governments sitting together and trying very hard to calm down the emotions of various governments that think war is a good idea.

 

... and finally, please explain to me how that correspnds to each other:

"DEMOCRACY IS THE BEST!"

"WE DON'T LISTEN TO ANY OTHER COUNTRY AND DO WHATEVER WE WANT!"

 

As I just re-watched the last ep of TNG, I'd like to let Captain Picard and Dara answer that: "It's like the chicken and the egg ... Data: It's a Paradoxon."

[Guest c4evap]

"The United States Of America does not negotiate with terrorists"

 

Ya know I was watching an old TNG episode "The High Ground" where Doctor Crusher is abducted by terrorists. Commander Riker sends a message to the leader: "Tell him the Federation is willing to negotiate for her release."

 

See? That's how an enlightened society acts. They don't treat terrorists as dogs. They treat them as the human beings they are & open up a dialogue/negotiation to SOLVE their differences, rather than spill blood.

 

We should be more like the Federation.

 

 

 

Terrorists ARE dogs. We do not and should not negotiate with them.

 

Regarding your comment about "spilling blood"...tell that to them and see just how "enlightened" they are.

 

c4 :(

[Varchld]

SO if a MOD could Lock this or put it in Rura, that would be great. B/c ppl here are not gonna see Eye to Eye and it has already been the source of a lot of problems between ppl on this site. So the MOD's wont get any argument from me if they wanna lock it up, b/c I know that ya'll have wanted to

 

I came across this site a few days ago, and being only moderately interested in most things sci-fi (though indeed immensely enjoying some in particular), actually registered particularly to post in this topic.

Though granted I would have found some other reason to register eventually.

It doesn't realy bother me if it's locked though, i've said much of my piece.

 

Though I do think that GhostShadows bubble has been rocked a little.

I'm not european either, and the U.N. has a constant command of a significant portion of our troops because our country knows that it's best for the region and our military is trying to make up for being unable to defend them in the last great (used loosely) war.

 

 

 

Now, 1st LT (O-2) Harvey Wysong, I would like to talk about this dude and others like him (in respect to their usage)

A random quote from an unknown soldier is worth it's weight in beer, as in i'd only trust it if i was drunk. The Armed Forces of every country are made up of a crapload of men (troops) and it's guaranteed that some of them aren't going to be enlightened.

In fact I believe that you could walk into any barrracks and drag them out to the pub and make them say anything.

 

[Guest c4evap]

SO if a MOD could Lock this or put it in Rura' date=' that would be great. B/c ppl here are not gonna see Eye to Eye and it has already been the source of a lot of problems between ppl on this site. So the MOD's wont get any argument from me if they wanna lock it up, b/c I know that ya'll have wanted to[/quote']

 

If enough complaints are registered with us MODS...it will get locked.

 

You can always PM one of us.

 

c4 B)

[Oranki]

omg how naive these yanks can be.. in case u haven't heard: the World hates USA for being a global bully that ignores the global disapproval for it's imperialistic wars. It won't be long now till China/UN/EU will tell when USA should jump and when not.. and USA will jump.