The 7 Worst Things The UN Has Ever Done

Posted by  $  allosaur 1 year, 3 months ago to History
37 comments | Share | Flag

Way back when fading "I Like Ike" bumper stickers were still on cars, little dino was taught in school that the UN was being formed to stop wars by negotiating peace.
Yeah, like that has really worked out well.
Snippet from the 7 worst things listed article~
"Staffed by dictators and tyrants, the UN has ignored some of the worst atrocities in the world, (etc).--"
Here's my happy Trump administration act of congress dino dream on the subject at hand~
The USA gets out of the UN and kicks that despicable organization out of our country.
Now what to do with that building?
Somehow hosting such things as hosting science fiction and comic book conventions strikes me as somehow appropriate.
SOURCE URL: http://www.dailywire.com/news/11906/7-worst-things-un-has-ever-done-michael-qazvini&utm_medium=email&utm_content=121416-news&utm_campaign=position1

Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  Dobrien 1 year, 3 months ago
    Thanks to the evil David and Nelson Rockefeller and the Dulles ,Bush
    Soros ,Rothschilds, the Clinton, Obama (patsies) new world order Government types who are all about wars and weapons dealing as well as eugenics. They have no care of human life and potential. Number 2 is the kind of thing Podesto and the Clintons with Jeffery Epstien are tied to. The whole fake news thing started after wikileaks released the Podesto "spirit dinner" invite. A child advocate worker investigating human trafficking of children in Haiti was murdered when she claimed to have the smoking gun linking The Clinton Foundation to human trafficking. It is all so evil so depraved that most don't believe their lying eyes.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  mminnick 1 year, 3 months ago
    Most of these worst things are not to be laid at the feet of the UN but rather at the feet of the UN Security Council permanent members (the USA, Russia, PRC, England and France).For anything to get done of a susstantive nature all 5 must agree on the action. those 5 can't agree on the time to start a meeting much less anything of substance.
    Take for example the "Police action" in Korea aka the Lorean War. UN forces were only deployed and sanctioned because Russia was boycotting the Security aCpincil and Taiwan was the Chinese representative at the time.
    Many horrific oncidents have occurred because the Permanent members could not/would not agree on a course of action.
    These 5 should be ashamed of themselves for the atrocities that have been committed under their watch as they stood by and didn't do a thing to stop them.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  rbroberg 1 year, 3 months ago
    The UN has no discernible principle, therefore, dealing with it has no discernible purpose.

    "Contrary to the fanatical belief of its advocates, compromise [on basic principles] does not satisfy, but dissatisfies everybody; it does not lead to general fulfillment, but to general frustration; those who try to be all things to all men, end up by not being anything to anyone. And more: the partial victory of an unjust claim, encourages the claimant to try further; the partial defeat of a just claim, discourages and paralyzes the victim."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Abaco 1 year, 3 months ago
    Didn't they also poop in the wells of Haitians post-earthquake? Can't remember where I heard this...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 1 year, 3 months ago
      July 10, 2015
      Seeking Justice From the UN for Haiti’s 700,000 Cholera Victims
      by Fran Quigley
      The announcement by the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti was only a slight exaggeration: “Everyone Tells UN to Fulfill Its Legal Obligations to Haiti Cholera Victims.”
      The statement referred to those who signed on to amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs asking the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals to allow a class action claim by Haiti cholera victims to go forward. And the list does seem to encompass nearly “everyone” that has an interest in justice and the rule of law, in Haiti and beyond: human rights experts, Haitian-American leaders, constitutional law scholars, and even a line-up of former UN officials.
      All are calling for justice for victims of the 2010 epidemic triggered by human waste recklessly discharged from a UN base in rural Haiti. The death toll stands at a shocking 9,000; over 700,000 more have been sickened.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 3 months ago
    The article is irrational. Looks more like a screed of a liberal than a rational critique of the UN.
    The writer repeatedly criticizes the UN for what it hasn't done, and I conclude he/she wants the UN to be an even bigger meddling bunch of looters than they are, but the writer just wants them to stop meddling with Israel.
    Like the UN, this article isn't worth the bandwidth it wastes.
    Close down the UN. Prosecute Obama for treason (and for fraud regarding his birth.) Reverse everything he did as president.
    Author, read some Ayn Rand.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 1 year, 3 months ago
    can you name one thing that the un has done that is good?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  1 year, 3 months ago
      Helping out with the Korean War appears to have been a good idea but that was way, way back when old dino was a little kid.
      South Koreans make dang good movies for a good reflection of their culture. Learned that via Netflix rentals.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 1 year, 3 months ago
    One reason to keep the UN in the USA is to give us easy access to them, even if we are not members. I point to Switzerland as an example of a host that did not (and does not) belong to (most of) the international organizations headquartered there.

    As I said above, it is not in the interests of the USA to foot the bill for the UN. However, being a member, especially on the Security Council, is in the interests of the USA.

    And, again, the root of the problem is the lack of philosophy, but that failure is ours first, as the government of the USA has been a weak advocate for a consistent understanding of human rights. In fact, ironically enough, Eleanor Roosevelt was probably a more consistent champion than our representatives since.

    BTW I read The Fearful Master by G. Edward Griffin about 1966. So, I understand the problems with the UN.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 1 year, 3 months ago
      "And again the root of the problem is the lack of philosophy"......... wrong.... the root of the problem is kakistocrats that do not have the authority to control me or you are encroaching on my freedom and most of them would kill or enslave me given the chance.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by preimert1 1 year, 3 months ago
    Hooray! What with Trump's example and Dino's post of last week, I no longer have to bite my tongue and conform to PC. For my liberal friends who have in the past accused me of using "PC" as a perjorative, I say piss off! So now I can express my views on Israel and the UN.

    First, i think the US tax payers should no longer be required to support Israel's fat asses with foreign aid. After 6 decades and $233.7 billion, (http://www.wrmea.org/congress-u.s.-ai...) they should by now no longer need that much susidizing. As we would say in the South, "we didn't take you to raise." At this point it would seem the main thrust is from the US military-industrial complex which wants to sell weaponry to all sides in the Middle-East (and complain about Russian competition)

    The UN General Assembly is basically an effieght club that talks a lot, but doesn't get much done. The main power lies with the security council--most specifically its five permanent members: China, Russia, France, UK and US. Israel uses the US as its surrogate in that we have our noses so far up Israel's ass, we can smell the pastrami.

    Anyway, if the UN really wanted to (and had any real power), regarding Israel gradually usurping Palastinian lands, they could settle the issue by saying that the border is officially the 1967 line and
    the Arab portion of Israel population (20%) are Israeli-Arabs while any Jews on the other side of the line are Palistinian Jews, with both subject to the laws of their respective countries. Sounds overly simplistic, but it might work--at least as well as other cockamamy ideas so far.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 1 year, 3 months ago
    I have to disagree with the intent. Moreover, using these atrocities to attack the UN ignores salient facts.

    First, I do agree that the USA has been the patsy, paying 25% of the UN operating budget while China, Russia, and other pay much less. (Germany pays about 10%.) Conservative News Service here http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/p... and
    Wikipedia here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...

    However, all of the many problems of the UN are rooted firmly in the failure of modern philosophy which caused a failure of resolve in the USA and the West. But that lack of will was internal first -- and internal to us (them, actually) millions of people who had no objective philosophy on which to base their political beliefs and agendas.

    The problems of the UN here and now are analogous to the problems of the United State of America in 1789. The United Colonies of the First Continental Congress would be like the League of Nations.

    What that article called "UN troops" were national troops deployed to the UN. The UN did not control them (obviously), own them, pay them, train them. The ideal UN force would be a trans-national, multinational division, in which pay came from the UN and loyalty was to the UN. Commanders from generals to corporals would rise to their ranks within a UN structure. That is not the case today.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo