Oh, and that the UN doesn't use right vs wrong to determine which resolutions to pass....which is a big part of the problem.[/quote]
I put some parts in bold:
[quote="Deacon";p="428888"]Arminius, you seem to have missed his point. He didn't say there was no approval or "popular support", but that "approval does not necessarily mean it is right" and vice versa (disapproval of something does not necessarily mean it is wrong).[/quote]
Ok, fine. "Does not necessarily mean it is right" compared to who Deacon ? And "Does not necessarily mean it is wrong" again compared to whom ? Right and Wrong is a concept, a thought, a vague idea, something that isn't clear, something subjective, different for everyone, etc. Some people judge the UN's deeds if they are right or wrong according to THEIR standards. Politicians and delegates at the UN don't discuss of right things or wrong things to pass resolutions.
[quote="Ric_Price";p="429976"]The UN is the most corrupt world body in existance. Look at the Security Council for the perfect example. France and Russia, who are both permanent members of the Council and hold Veto Power veto'ed pretty much everything during the hieght of the Iraq Sancations because in doing those things and agreeing to them, they would be hurt in the pocket book thanks to all that ILLEGAL money they had flowing in through ILLEGAL deals with Hussein.[/quote]
I don't think so. France wanted to lift the sanctions from Iraq in the mid '90 and America used their veto to maintain the sanction. Dude, you have absolutly no idea how those sanctions have affected the Iraqi people. Illegal deals ? What illegal deals ? Care to clarify please ? Anyway, the UN SC is not necessarily corrupted because some of its member fear for their economic interests. I mean, if the US prefer to not intervene in Darfour because they have economic interest there, well US is not necessarily corrupted because of that. Egocentric, yes, not corrupted. Make the distinction
[quote="D-Mac";p="430276"]Still. It's not too different than international relations would be without the UN. Only now, everyone pretends believe in the legality of the UN's decisions when they like them, and tries to get around it when they don't.[/quote]
First, the UN is a US invention. Secondly, The United State created the UN with others allies to PREVENT wars. No UN, no dialogue, no dialogue = raise of tension. That's a big difference in international relations.
Sorry Peter, but normally, you have no credibility when you're talking about the French history or French's deeds. End of discussion.
