Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Saturday, Oct. 13, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
United States sovereignty is under siege by “one world” United Nations socialists. America should exit the U.N., cease all financial support and kick the world organization out of America.
Most of the nation members are aligned against the U.S. and its interests.
The only rationale keeping us there is a diplomatic connection with these countries, many of which are rogue nations.
Security Council decisions are typically blocked by China and Russia and are contrary to American interests across the globe.
What the U.S. requires is a smaller international organization that consists of members who share common interests in global economic and defense matters.
A collection of allied nations similar to NATO. If necessary, a U.N. coordinating arm could be established in the new international organization.
Every American you should support quitting all the UN social programs
I would advocate staying in the UN, but I would reduce our funding of it to a much lower level. Bob Jack and Future are correct in that our interests do not align with many other nations in the UN.
The UN is like PBS. It has some positive attributes but the amount of money we spend on it is out of proportion to its importance and we need to find every way we can find to reduce what government spends.
Michael
I second Mr. Casler's motion.
CarmineD
In reply to Bob Jack; anyone can easily sense the frustration that you have concerning American foreign policy and the United Nations. To some lesser degree, I share the same frustrations.
However, abandoning and or eliminating the United Nations would be a huge mistake for us here in America.
FIGHTING THE INVISABLE WAR
Many people here in America believe that the only war the United States is fighting presently is in Afghanistan. Wrong!!! The cyber war that we hear least about or the invisible war has been in full-swing for several decades. Cyber war is more dangerous than physical attacks.
There needs to be treaties established between countries about cyberspace, and more rules around this. There also needs to be more regulations - and more enforcement of existing laws. Without the United Nations to rely on in passage of these international laws / safeguards, we as a country stand to lose our position as the world leader in cyber weaponry / defense systems. Right now, Mr. Jack, cyber space can honestly be classified as a form of the "Wild West".
None of us could imagine a world without laws on the development and use of nuclear weapons. In large part, we have the United Nations to thank for this. However, a world without the same type of laws and enforcement of cyber warfare is even a greater threat to humanity. Bob, we do need the United Nations.
The U.N. is not only the antithesis to what America stands for, it is totally ineffective when it comes to preventing the slaughter of innocents anywhere in the world. It stood by as slaughters took place in Rwanda and the Sudan; it can't do a thing about the situation in Syria; and it twiddles its useless thumbs over the threat posed by Irans nuclear ambitions. Because the U.N. is composed of a host of rogue nations hell-bent on destroying freedom & Democracy, the U.S. is frustrated at nearly every turn. Why do we cede our sovereignty to nations such as China & Russia, Cuba & North Korea, all of whom desire our economic and political demise? Who needs enemies when one has friends such as the U.N.?
I have read all the posts above and totally respect what all of you have to say. Jerry Fink captures the essense of my main concerns.
Mr. Jack,
I concur exactly with your idea. It certainly is not in our National interest to either belong to or host the United Nations.
However, my sense is that this old adage holds true here: Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Regards,
Purgatory
US share - 516 million for regular UN budget; 2.1 billion for peacekeeping budget. Like most of what our government is doing, we are spending more than we can afford on the UN. The spending needs to be examined and reduced.
I know that many people think everything is 'vital', but logic tells us that just isn't true.
Michael
It seems that the most effective thing that the UN does is make money disappear.
In reply to those who do not believe the United Nations performs instrumental international purposes and meanings, I recommend you view John Donne's writing on "No Man Is An Island".
His message is, "Human beings, as well as nations, do not thrive when isolated from others."
George Bush went to war with Iraq because they did not comply with UN regulations. OK good, then we won't get drawn into Iran either.
TeaNutz...
I'm sure you've heard the old adage;
"It's not what you say, it's how you say it."
Your personal attacks at all things 'liberal' is both out of touch with reality & quite intended to be slanderous.
Additionally, your neo-right-wing rantings & ravings paint you as an absurd caricature of the quintessential 'TeaNut.'
Perhaps a more adult approach would be in order.
In reply to "Tea" Mark Traeger; thank you for some very informative links in your above post.
I agree that the advanced jurisdictions of not only our federal government, but the United Nations, as well, sometimes become a road block to our best interests. No argument there. Many areas in both need to be cutback and or eliminated.
However, the presence of America in the United Nations remains paramount. In the debate the other night, Vice-President Biden elaborated on the fact that through the United Nations, America has the international support of economic sanctions placed against Iran. It is true the majority of nations in the world do not want Iran to have a nuclear armament. In this, the United Nations have served all of us with an invaluable gift giving the "green light" to pursue these crippling economic sanctions against Iran.
But this is not enough to neutralize Iran's threats against the entire free world. Therefore, President Obama has done the "right thing" by, "ordering the Stuxnet attack on Iran as part of a wave of cyber sabotage and espionage against this would-be nuclear power."
Cyber-attacks against America by countries such as Iran and North Korea are designed with the attempt to completely cripple the entire electronic / computerized infrastructure of America. We need the United Nations more than ever to adopt international laws not only against such cyber-terrorism acts, but also establishing international support in harsh retaliations of such attacks against our country from these nations of lawlessness.
The UN is not only the Security Council, but much more.
The main complaints seem to come about the Security Council with 5 permanent voting members: China, Russia, France, the UK and the US.
The other 15 can put in their 2 cents but are non-voting countries.
The functions and power of the UN Security Council is not all bad. Had people been paying attention to what was going on in the Security Council before we attacked Iraq, they would have know that Iraq had no WMD's. Bush was so intent on attacking that he lied to the American public to accomplish his goals. Our ignorance is no reason to blame the UN.
In that instance, France and Russia vetoed because they had a contract for an oil pipeline to be built. They were protecting their interests, especially in light of the fact there were no WMD's.
We circumvented the UN Security Council vote and did what Bush wanted.
I think the UN Security Council offers a good process at trying to reconcile differences between countries.
http://www.un.org/en/sc/about/functions....
In addition, it does many other things to help humanity in development, human rights, humanitarian support, and international law.
The US does not only have interests in war, and has the ability to add it's voice on other issues in the global community, even if we don't respect others in the global community.
I support the UN efforts, and hope someday the US attitudes can evolve into a cooperative one rather than demanding everyone do as we want and think like we do. It is worth the investment, especially now.
Translation "They don't play the way I want to play, im taking my ball and going home!!!" ~Bob Jack
The United Nations is not perfect but it gets a great deal accomplished that is beneficial to the world in general...
It's a shame that we didn't join the League of Nations after World War I.
If Romney is elected in November, (god forbid...) look for a Bush re-tread to be appointed as a US representative to the UN...
Probably most of you know who I'm talking about...
He has gone on record many. many times saying that the United States should get out of the UN. He is one of the all time bullies on Capital Hill....
I'm talking about John Bolton.....
Bolton reminds me of a bad peeny who won't go away...He keeps showing up!
Of course, putting Bolton back at the UN would be better than a "wet dream" for many on this board.....right Bobby Jack?
Peacelilly states "Had people been paying attention to what was going on in the Security Council before we attacked Iraq, they would have know that Iraq had no WMD's".
Here is a YouTube video of prominent democrats stating before, during and after the start of the Iraq engagement their views that Iraq had WMD's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwqh4wQPo...
"Get us out of the UN" was the first political battle cry I remember, circa 1960. The equivalent existed in the 1930's through the organization called "The America First Committee", with it's most outspoken member, Charles Augustus Lindbergh.
Chuck was a non-interventionist, also called an isolationist. His speeches claimed that Hitler would never cross the Atlantic and only Europe was involved. Chuck hobnobbed with the Nazis, drank with the Nazis, beer fested with the Nazis and Hermann Goering in particular, his flying buddy. From his speeches, he was an Aryan and race was of supreme importance because it foretold of great power.
Chuck warned American that they should not mess with Nazi Germany because of the superiority of the Nazi's discipline and fighting capabilities. The America First organization demanded that Europe be left to it's own politics.
Allowing world politics to evolve on their own has been the premier failure of the conservative (Fascist) mindset since the 1930's, but here it is again - being presented like a new idea.
The next thing you will hear is how Moses crossed the Delaware, in the second boat behind Washington, who was too involved with the landing ahead to notice.
Conservatives have little capability of original thinking which is why they continually revert back to 3500 year old thought in the Bible and regurgitate the thoughts of a dead past. Their premier objective is Armageddon, where the world is rid of everyone who is not of the Body on behalf of the Prince of Peace.
That includes Big Bird, America's number one feather bedding Socialist.
Jon Becker said this about Charles A Lindbergh...
"Chuck was a non-interventionist, also called an isolationist. His speeches claimed that Hitler would never cross the Atlantic and only Europe was involved. Chuck hobnobbed with the Nazis, drank with the Nazis, beer fested with the Nazis and Hermann Goering in particular, his flying buddy. From his speeches, he was an Aryan and race was of supreme importance because it foretold of great power.
Chuck warned American that they should not mess with Nazi Germany because of the superiority of the Nazi's discipline and fighting capabilities. The America First organization demanded that Europe be left to it's own politics."
Very good post & very true...Lindbergh was also awarded a special Nazi medal which he went to Germany to accept.
While in Germany, the Nazi's hood-winked Lindbergh by taking him to a different air strip each day & allowing him/encouraging him to fly one or more of the planes at that particular air strip.
Lindbergh did just that and later came home talking about what a great air force the Germans had... He also said, as Jon mentioned, that it would be a huge mistake for us to ever go to war against Germany. After all, they had the largest & best air force in the world....
What Lindbergh didn't know was that he saw the same planes each day as he traveled from one air strip to another.
The Germans would move all of the planes to the next air strip over night and Lindbergh never figured out what was going on...
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservative...."
(John Stuart Mill)
I agree with BChap, El_Lobo and peacelily.
We need to stay in the United Nations.
Republicans here are wrong again.
Just another reason that we need to keep them out
of the White House.
RefNV,
Better than YouTube, I watched the live Security Council meeting on CSPAN when Hans Blix gave his final report on the inspections in Iraq, looking for WMD's.
His verbal report was to be followed by a written report in 30 days.
He reported that NO WMD's were found, nor the capacity to create the super gun that was rumored. The Nigerian uranium tubes was proven to be a fake, as well as Saddam being involved with Al Qaeda, and no evidence that he had been involved with the events on 911.
All of this was before we attacked Iraq.
I told my husband at the time that the US wouldn't wait for a written report and would hastily invade Iraq before it was published. Bush attacked Iraq 2 weeks before the report came out.
I did an exhaustive search to find media coverage of what I saw on CSPAN and found nothing.
It is likely that had the written report came out before we invaded, the nation would have learn there were no WMD's found in Iraq, which was confirmed after we invaded by our own military, and questions might have arisen about why we were talking about invading Iraq. What a waste!
It wasn't the UN who was at fault, it was the US alone. We ignored the process and did as we pleased, sending our military into harms way for no reason.
Even if one defends the action for the purpose of getting Saddam, we stayed beyond that. We should have let the Iraqi's handle how they wanted to proceed with their country, without our self interested meddling.
Had we done that, it might be that we would have an Iraq friendly to us, and not bitter.
Peacelilly, you don't like hearing a youtube video of democrats stating that WMD's were in Iraq based on intelligence briefings. It's difficult hearing members of the Clinton administration stating Iraq had WMD's based on their intel briefings. Peacelily, when are you going to explain to LVS readers why you want to split the United States into 3 or 4 countries as you've stated in the past?
RefNv I'm very interested in hearing why peacelily wants to split the US into 3 or 4 countries but she just won't respond to that.
I agree Chuck. Peacelily should explain why she wants the United States to be split into 3 or 4 countries. She should also explain why she backs Obama when he has such a poor economic record. Does Peacelily like seeing 23 million jobless/under-employed Americans struggling under 4 years of Obama's anti-business trickle down government policies?
It is time to back out of the UN. Would make some sense to do this in stages but within 5 - 10 years being completely out, unless other nations and the UN change their tunes. Americans fund so much of the UN and then America steps in and adds to any and every UN "effort." Ditto with NATO. Why do we have a bloated State Department when we don't utilize it correctly? We don't need to double-stream and triple-stream every effort to redo every place on the planet outside the U.S. We should NOT be intervening in the economy and culture of every tribe on the planet. Let them evolve and progress within their cultures and stop generating "approved" societies and nations that become like dependent children, dependent social welfare programs.
Anybody else notice that Great Britain now, others over the past few years, have decided to WITHDRAW THOUSANDS OF TROOPS from Afghanistan pronto but will seemingly leave a token presence for however long we screw around there--end of 2014. Let's save 2 years of financial stupidity and GET OUR TROOPS OUT NOW. And do not send ANY contractors, advisers....
Yep, something's seldom change...
Particularly with those who sleep over on the right. The US is doing the right thing by staying put in the United Nations...
It was almost a crime and it was a lesson of failure on our part when we didn't join the League of Nations after World War I..
Our membership in the League might have changed the course of history, particularly what was going on in Europe during the 1920's & 1930's.....
We instead decided to turn our back on Europe and ignore all of Europe's problems and we know what happened as a result of that, don't we?
Historians agree that our failure to join the League and use our well earned position of world leader greatly contributed to a situation that moved the world down a one way road to a second World War.
Harry Truman once said that if there had been a Marshall Plan in Europe after World War I, there would not have been a World War II.....
I believe Harry was correct....
I get a real chuckle out of TEA's rant about liberals, socialists & and marxists.
TEA is a typical extremists who lives over on the right...
He paints with a very broad brush & he knows no real history...
He probably believes that Joe McCarthy was a GREAT American.
He probably believes that all those Americans that Joe went after, and destroyed despite the fact that they weren't communists, was nothing more than a little collateral damage...
The real danger to America isn't the so called liberals and socialists that TEA rants about but the real danger is people like TEA, himself, who wants to change America into some right-wing fascist state where "goose stepping" is the order of the day...
Sorry TEA...I'm going to keep the America that I presently see which includes an America who works for world peace through the UN..
Could WW2 been prevented if the Senate ratified the league of nations ? Could 911 been prevented if they had counted the votes right in Florida ? Houston is an example and a reminder that Republicans are just plain bad for the country and the world.
Mr. Kelly: In all probability, without Republicans you wouldn't be here--or should we say the nation wouldn't be here. The country would have imploded long ago from endless social welfare and no one working to pay for it.
Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
TEA has over heated & blown a fuse....
NO surprise there! Actually fascism is squarely on the right. I've NEVER seen a noted historian or a legitimate political scientist who has ever claimed anything different...
The old National Socialist term used by the Nazi's has my little buddy TEA very confused......
I wonder if TEA is familiar with the book "Mein Kampf?"
Probably not....
I wonder if TEA has ever read one of the best books ever written ("The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer) about Hitler and the Third Reich?
Probabably not!
The old saying, "a little bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing" fits TEA like a glove....
He has bought into the old trap that a majority of right-wingers buy into......believe what ever FIXED NEWS or Rush Limbaugh or some "johnnie come lately" historians such as Jonah Goldberg says...
I've seen and read parts of Goldberg's book about "liberal fascism" which is nothing more than an oxymoron..... Talk about a lot of hot air!!!!
The tern National Socialism was selected early on in the formative years of the Nazi Party when anyone on the right or left was allowed to join the party.
The Nazi's were small in number and short on cash and their main goal was to over throw the Weimer Republic in Germany....
Yes, there were socialists in the Nazi Party early on but that came to a sudden halt once the "Night of the Long Knives" took place....
Those who were socialist or had socialist leaning were driven out of the party & several leaders of the left wing of the Nazi Party were killed...
Do the names Otto Strasser & Gregor Strasser mean anything to you? How about Ernest Roehm?
All three men leaned far to the left and Hitler finally decided to eliminate them. They wanted the Nazi Party to move far to the left and make allies of the communists who were also in Germany battling for political control.
Hitler would not hear of it. He "kicked "all three men (the Stressor brothers and Ernest Roehm) out of the Nazi Party. He wanted all socialists out of the party...
He looked upon all socialists as merely communists or Bolsheviks!
MORE TO COME.....
El_Lobo......
YES, TEA demonstrates to us how horrible and out
of touch right-wing extremists are.
These right-wing extremists lied us into Iraq,
sent all of our jobs to COMMUNIST CHINA, destroyed
our middle class and economy and have the nerve
to call liberals fascists?
WOW!
There is no way the majority of Americans will
vote romney/ryan, who are more extreme than
bush/cheney, to continue the middle class
destruction.
WE'RE NOT STUPID!
FOUR MORE YEARS FOR PRESIDENT OBAMA!!!
AND......
The "Night of the Long Knives" took place in 1934. Actually Gregor Strasseo was killed during the "Night of the Long Knives." His brother Otto fled the country but not before attempting to break up the Nazi Party with an extreme left-wing group called the Black Front.
Ernest Roehm was arrested during the "Night of the Long Knives." He was put in jail & later shot. The Nazi Party has successfully rid itself of all socialists...
In short, the term National Socialism has little to do with socialism. Hitler could NEVER have come to power with out the backing of Germany's rich & powerful families. They backed Hitler because they were scared to death that the communists might gain control of the government & "true socialism" would become the order of the day.
Hitler NEVER made any attempt to take control of land in Germany. He believed in private ownership of land and he worked with big business in Germany (the Krupp Corporation for example..) to get Germany back on his feet economically....
In other words, private ownership of land & private ownership of business was a big thing in Germany. Hitler didn't even put Germany on a complete war time footing until 1943. That was after both the US and the UK did....
During both World War I and World War II, the Krupp famiily (great steel makers...) made millions in profit. They backed Hitler because he made NO attempt to nationalize their business. The same was true with the other leading business groups in Germany....
NO, fascism is on the right. Socialism & communism is on the left....
That's your history lesson for today! Enjoy!
Hey, this may help you understand what I've been saying....
"Following his expulsion, he set up his own party, the Black Front, composed of radical ex-Nazis, in an attempt to split the Nazi Party. Here his lack of anti-Semitism was displayed by his willingness to associate with Jews,[2] such as an exile from Germany named Helmut Hirsch, who would later be executed for an attempted plot on Hitler. His party proved unable to counter Hitler's rise to power in 1933, and Strasser spent the years of the Third Reich in exile. The Nazi Left itself was annihilated during the Night of the Long Knives in 1934 (in which his brother was killed), leaving Hitler as undisputed party leader and able to pacify both industrialists and the military into accepting his new National Socialist regime. In addition to the "Black Front", Strasser at this time headed the Free German Movement outside Germany which sought to enlist the aid of Germans throughout the world in bringing about the downfall of Hitler and Nazism."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Strass...
teamster....
I agree....four more years for President Obama!
He deserves a chance to finish what he started. I believe the economy will continue to pick up steam if Obama is re-elected.....
TEA is a typical right-winger. He knows little & talks a lot!
We can, for now, remain a member of the U.N., if they cut our dues and funding to what others pay. However, we need to INSIST that nations cannot bring an entourage of terrorists/spies with them to "attend" U.N. functions in New York. Let's move the U.N. meeting building to Brazil.