|
|
Post by panzerman on Feb 11, 2012 18:22:58 GMT -8
I think it is high time that changes are made too the United Nations, Permament Council. First of all, why the USSR was ever given a seat is beyond comphrension. In 1946, Josef Stalins USSR had recorded the greatest number of human rights abuses over a short span of 30 yrs, 60+ million people exterminated, same number in slave camps, prisons. Ditto for the People Rep. of China, 120+ million due to stravation, extermination, ethnic cleansing. To be fair, these outrages took place after Chinas inception in 1946 under then the Nationalist Govt. Present day, we have a grave situation in Assads Syria, yet the Chinese, Russian veto any sort of action vs the murderous Assad regime. China also supported the Sudanese genocide in Darfur, supported Dear Departed Leader Kim Il Jong, supplied arms too African despots like Mugabe, Idi Amin, Bokassa. I think it is time too kick these members out, and replace them with democratic powers like Germany, Japan, Italy. John  |
|
|
|
|
|
Post by papilio28570 on Feb 12, 2012 8:57:45 GMT -8
While the killings in Syria are to be deplored and should be stopped, I worry about the consequences of toppling the Assad regime. It is my understanding, from friends who have family there, that the Christians and the Jews in Syria support Assad and that the protests are being instigated by Muslim militants. There is great fear of religious persecution as happened in Lebanon and currently happening in Egypt once the Muslim militants gain the upper hand.
Your thoughts welcomed.
|
|
|
|
Post by joee30 on Feb 12, 2012 11:43:11 GMT -8
True, but since Lebanon also has a pretty sizeable christian population, they have resistance groups. Their christian para-military groups helped out Israel both wars they have gone to fight in Lebanon. Egypt is the same and so is Syria. Iraq was a different story as all the christians and jews fled the country once it started going downhill again.
|
|
|
|
Post by wollastoni on Feb 13, 2012 0:43:39 GMT -8
China and Russia are so supportive with Assad's regime and other dictatorial regimes, because they know they are the next ones on the list of popular revolutions.
But I think having such hyperpowers out of the UN permanent council would be a problem for world peace.
|
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Feb 17, 2012 16:24:38 GMT -8
I think the fear is lost income from arms sales, particularly Russia.
|
|
|
|
Post by colin12303 on Mar 6, 2012 13:37:19 GMT -8
Why does the U.S and the U.K always have to poke their noses in where it is not wanted.
Matters are always made a lot worse,we end up in wars for many years that cannot be won,and thousands of our armed forces personel are killed.
Pressure should be put on the surrounding Arab states to sort this out,all the time other nations get involved they will just sit back and watch
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Apr 8, 2012 17:29:17 GMT -8
Why does the U.S and the U.K always have to poke their noses in where it is not wanted. Matters are always made a lot worse,we end up in wars for many years that cannot be won,and thousands of our armed forces personel are killed. Pressure should be put on the surrounding Arab states to sort this out,all the time other nations get involved they will just sit back and watch While I generally agree, and certainly in hindsight it's easy to play armchair quarterback, would the world really want US and UK to have a strictly isolationist policy? What if US had elected to not get involved in that mess in Europe in the 1940s? What if US had elected to sit out Bosnia? What if US had agreed to the Greater Asian Economic Co-Prosperity Sphere? What might have happened if US had made selective strikes against Pol Pot? What might have happened if US had dropped troops into Rwanda to replace the useless UN? What if the US got involved in Dafur a long, long time ago? What would have happened had US decided to slag Libyan leadership after the Lockerbie bombing? What if US and Belgium hadn't stood against the Simba hostage takers in Congo in the 1960s? What if US and Belgium refused to arm the Israelis in the 1970s? It's easy to pick a bipolar policy- either isolationism or the world's police force. But the world is not black and white. Sometimes mistakes are made, and knowledge only comes with hindsight. |
|
|
|
Post by panzerman on Apr 9, 2012 18:10:36 GMT -8
All of the trouble in the Middle East has its origins from WW1, and its aftermath. Had the Allies left the Ottoman Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Hapsburg Empire, and German Empire intact, since the War was mostly a result of Serbian-Czarist Russia intrigue, too provoke a conflict vs the Hapsburg Empire which was very weak in 1914 and in doing so, win territory and prevent a frementing rebellion in Russia. However, France, Britain in the Treaty of Versailles blamed the War on the losers and dismembered esp. the Ottoman Empire, carving out Colonial fiefdoms in Iraq, Syria, TransJordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Bahrain, Aden and left Saudi Arabia to form a seventh century feudal kingdom... a recipe for disaster. Now, the Moslem Brotherhood, along with the Saudis will turn the whole area into a Caliphate, returning too the Dark Ages, Lawrence of Arabia probably would be ashamed for his part in that.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by exoticimports on Apr 23, 2012 20:22:00 GMT -8
. Now, the Moslem Brotherhood, along with the Saudis will turn the whole area into a Caliphate, returning too the Dark Ages, Lawrence of Arabia probably would be ashamed for his part in that. John Except that while Europe was in the Dark Ages, the Islamic world suffered no such thing, embracing science and art and tolerance. The European Dark Ages were brought on by the church, and that alone. What if in the 90s, instead of bombing our Serbian friends, we had simply allied with them and told them to cut the crap? Both (well, three) sides were guilty of relgion-based atrocities, but the Serbs at that time had the upper hand, so generated more genocide. I'd bet the Serbs would have complied. Instead, today, they hate the USA, feel betrayed, and the situation is not changed. So, back on the original topic, should USA pull out of South Sudan support? Pull out the advisors who are planning against the LRA? Should USA advisors (and there are tens of thousands, it's just not in the news for obvious reasons) depart from Vietnam? Let Mog go it's way? Did USA do the right thing by suspending support of the pro-democracy, anti-Toto forces? Ignoring Rwanda? Staying out of the Nazi-CCCP Poland division? Should USA learned a lesson from Pearl Harbor and let Japan rule those with epicanthal folds? Perhaps USA should have refused what we know as Lend-Lease to Russia? Or maybe American gun owners should have not sent personally owned arms to the British Home Guard? I live not in a black and white world. In such, I, and USA as a society, make mistakes in hindsight. So, my European colleages, should USA take an isolationist stance, exit the UN and kick UN out of NY? Or continue interference policies, for good or bad, in international conflicts? Continuing on the current policy of supporting failed UN activities is not an option. If you had to pick an extreme, US in or US out, which would it be? |
|
