Comments on: Traveling without divisions, you don’t get no respect

By: pietrafitta

pietrafitta — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 23:02:06 +0000

16ea79 3e5433aa02

By: Sergey

Sergey — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 21:16:26 +0000

In old Russia there was a proverbial Yiddish saying on usefulness of formalities of law in dealing with those who do not respect law: “Scribe mit a Hund a Dogovor” (sign a treaty with a dog so it would not bite you). Better, pretend that you are picking up a stone from the ground: almost always the dog will turn tail. The only situation when this would not work is when the dog is rabid. In this case you need use a gun, and if you have not one, any suitable tool to kill it as quickly as you can.

By: strcpy

strcpy — Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:57:37 +0000

Sergey,

It’s not hard to fathom – I didn’t need to read the article (though I did). Lets even assume that a few of the countries that *should* know better do (France and Germany for two), the UN is still mostly Robert Mugabe’s voting what to do.

Of course they are going to condemn the US and Britain. It’s like asking the mafia if the police are doing right by locking down on protection schemes, bribing, money laundering, and other such crimes.

Add in that a certain percentage will *always* choose that side and you get the vast majority of world opinion is violent dictator friendly. Until dictators are not given the same vote as non-dictator (fat chance) or the hated police finally remove most of them the UN will always be that way. Mugabe or any of his like aren’t going to vote themselfs away and the non-confrontationals will always give in to them.

By: Sergey

Sergey — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 00:32:16 +0000

For those who seriously want to understand the role of EU and UN in Iran nuclear crisis, I strongly advise to read the following:
http://www.steynonline.com/pageprint.cfm?edit_id=37

By: Senescent Wasp

Senescent Wasp — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 23:55:39 +0000

scary,
Try to not be so like a troll. “Creeps” how last week. “Rocks”, how last month.

Here is the way that scary is using the term “hegemony”: “…a term used mostly by Marxist critics to delineate the web of dominant ideologies within a society.”
The term itself owes much to Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist.

Here is a less value laden definition:“preeminence of one group over others”

The UN has failed by any objective standard. It will continue to fail for reasons too tedious to discuss here. Currently, it is in the interest of the US to continue to use it to achieve foreign policy objectives while reserving the rights of a sovereign state. Full stop.

Far from “disruption”, the actions of the UN merely point out its futility. This is called “Realpolitik”, …foreign politics based on practical concerns rather than theory or ethics” Realpolitik, German for the politics of reality is the actual way that states act. The rest is simply window dressing. It’s idiocy to pretend otherwise.

By: Sergey

Sergey — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 22:48:24 +0000

When diplomacy failed, other measures must be considered and implemented. And I do not expect that UN approval need to be sought for going to war: these decisions are not under UN jurisdiction. Principle of national sovereignty has precedence of any UN resolutions.

By: Sergey

Sergey — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 22:32:09 +0000

If stability is supreme goal, UN activity makes sense. But if there is something more important, for example, real progress in resolving ubearable situation, you should seek another means than UN resolutions. No status quo can be maintained indefinitely long. History is unstoppable, and some problems simply have no peacefull solutions. So to think that UN can in principle (with Kofi Anan or otherwise) provide solution for every situation is utopian illusion.

By: Mariah Scary

Mariah Scary — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:49:03 +0000

I love Kofi, 2001 Nobel Peace Laureate, too. He rocks!

By: Mariah Scary

Mariah Scary — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:47:54 +0000

I always find it sadly amusing when, as soon as a decision in the UN goes any way other than that explicitely desired by the US, you creeps immediately start howling. However, with the American ‘cash-money’ approach to democracy I can see how you would fail to appreciate how great it is that a little group of dirty “2-strander” countries can disrupt your vast tyrannical “3-strand” hegemony.

I love the UN, they rock!

By: milgrams37

milgrams37 — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 20:18:04 +0000

People keep confusing the role the UN was designed to play in the world. It is not to dispense justice, liberate the oppressed, protect the innocent, enforce treaties, etc. Its goal simply is to maintain stability between and among member-states. It suggests compromise, any compromise, in lieu of *international* war, that is, war across borders.

Witness the recent compromise it has made between Israel and Hezbollah, whose identification has been upgraded from a terrorist group into a type of nation-state which can be a party to international treaties.

To assume the UN would do anything about Iran enforcement-wise is to misunderstand the very nature of that organization.