I have read a very good article today titled “Should the UN be taken seriously?” and I totally agree with the words of Shoeb Hamid, an author of this article. According to him “The UN has become a puppet in the hands of privileged nations. The decisions taken by it in the recent past prove that it is susceptible to external pressures.” He also used the word “Omnipotent” with UN.

Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the UN, can’t just beat the culprits out. It is not a free enterprise, independent of external pressures. Consider this - 22 per cent of its finances are payable by America. Money plays an important role in the decisions taken by the UN.

The US is further playing with it, this time it is the bill, H.R.4818 introduced by the Congress to further conform United Nations to the US lines. They are supposed to cut down their contributions to half by the year 2008. In June 2005, a task force, constituted for the same, released its report entitled ‘American Interests and UN Reforms.’ This clearly shows how much power the American constitution exercises over the UN.

All this leaves all of us thinking about power, how it gets corrupted and how the system is against any change intended for a role reversal. Shoeb Hamid supported the term United Nations but with little modification. It should be the United Privileged Nations instead of United Nations. So, what do you think? Should it be really the “United Privileged Nations” instead of “United Nations”?
>> Link of his article

The second the UN shows any autonomy, WW3 will break out. Americans (Republicans) will not put up with having 3rd world dictators have any governing power over us. The Democrats of course will be the ones fighting for the UN, traitors again, just like the last Civil War.

You speak for all true Patriots once again Righty. We do not want any 3rd world dictators around here and the people will not stand for it. I'm not sure what your point is about the War of Succession, as we call it here. I don't believe that the UN was in business at that time, although they probably would have supported the Yankee dictator if they could. Anyways, it wasn't the South's fault that the war was lost. We did our best. It was the (*)(*)(*)(*) Republicans under Lincoln that invaded down here and they are still occupying every state capitol in Dixie. Every white Southerner is rolling over in his grave - if he is dead I mean. Republicans ruined the South in 1865 and they are ruining it today. They are worse than that Coffee
Amen at the UN. "Affirmative actions" is just the same old "civil rights" the 3rd world is always asking money for. It makes me sick! But don't give up yet, Righty, the South will rise again. We have been down but we aren't out by a country mile. God bless you.

__________________
Momentum will be gathered. Housing will begat jobs. Jobs will begat housing.

Defending Dixie and being Conservative (or Republican) creates too many paradoxes in the mind.

And those 3rd world countries that do not have dictators (the mayority)?? And is the 1st world dictators that is already dictating to the UN ok???


Just wondering

__________________
“The subject no longer has to be mentioned by name. Someone is sick. Someone else is feeling better now. A friend has just gone back into the hospital. Another has died. The unspoken name, of course, is AIDS.”
“From the point of view of the pharmaceutical industry, the AIDS problem has already been solved. After all, we already have a drug which can be sold at the incredible price of $8, 000 an annual dose, and which has the added virtue of not diminishing the market by actually curing anyone.”

Well even if you're right, the solution seems easy enough: Don't have the U.S. pay so much. That will reduce their influence.

Of course, that means other countries will have to pay more. But I don't see any way around that.

So if y'all want to pony up the cash, I'm sure the U.S. will be willing to cut back its contribution.

__________________
Man up.

Yeah, but if I am not mistaken, for a very long time, the UN really struggled to get the US to pay it's dues. Then all of a sudden, when the 'WAR ON TERROR' started, the US strated paying again.


?

__________________
“The subject no longer has to be mentioned by name. Someone is sick. Someone else is feeling better now. A friend has just gone back into the hospital. Another has died. The unspoken name, of course, is AIDS.”
“From the point of view of the pharmaceutical industry, the AIDS problem has already been solved. After all, we already have a drug which can be sold at the incredible price of $8, 000 an annual dose, and which has the added virtue of not diminishing the market by actually curing anyone.”

Yeah, and that was obnoxious. But I think the impetus to pay up began long before the war on terror. It was just held up in the Senate by a few hardcore senators who were opposed to the whole idea of the UN.

__________________
Man up.