Main > Everything Else
U.N. takes SOME steps, at least (formerly - where's the equivalent outrage)
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: Crazy Cooter on February 19, 2005, 11:07:42 pm ---So are you mad about the lack of coverage, the incidents themselves, the possible coverup, or that the US still looks bad?
...that should get Drew going...
--- End quote ---
Not mad at anything. Simply astounded at the apparent double-standard as it relates to the U.S.
There are numerous people here from other countries pointing to how terrible Abu Gharib was, and nary a peep has been uttered by them about this issue I bring up.
As for taking care of the U.S. first, then fix the rest of the world stance, that's asinine, UNLESS I'm going to hear an equal amount of griping about the money/supplies sent to Africa and the like to combat their problems, primarily the AIDS epidemic they have over there. That's what's known as a "cop out".
As for claiming this to be a "straw man", offering that up is a straw man itself. It neither negates, justifies, or explains away atrocities committed by the U.N.
In fact, it ignores the fact that the U.N. has been made aware of child porn and child prostitution as a problem within its organization and that it has been happening since BEFORE 9/11, and demonstrates an organization that was willing to cover up things such as this. It also points to the corruption of an organization unwilling to assist in removing a dictator who had committed acts at least as heinous as members of that organization. It points to the willingness of member nations of this organization willing to overlook and cover up the abuse of sanctions programs designed to assist the people of Iraq and the fact that Sadaam was using the program to keep his people in the situation the program was designed to alleviate in order to paint a picture of America as the bad guy.
I'm simply pointing out that no one has even gotten their panties askew over this, and figured by posting this, there'd be people who would be able to "open their mouth, and remove all doubt".
I'm also stating that because there isn't an American leading this, that THAT'S the reason this isn't at least as big as Abu Gharib.
This isn't about the gold standard or an oil-backed economy or if America is better or worse than other countries or any of that crap.
This is about child porn and prostitution being run under the auspices of a U.N. peacekeeping mission.
As much as is made about how bad we were and Bush should hang for whatever, THIS should be plastered all over American news as well as the "atrocities" (and nice misuse of the word, btw) of our troops, because this would point out to the American public just one more reason why we SHOULDN'T have even sniffed around that organization for approval/help. Paint the WHOLE picture, don't just tell us "Bush made a mistake by not getting U.N. approval", tell us how corrupt the organization we were supposed to obtain approval from IS, unless you feel that's insignificant.
fredster:
Drew, there is always a double standard for the US.
Remember the Uproar at the Tsunami? We were toooo cheap with our money. I don't know where we stand with the world on that one, but we are actively trying to get that money where it belongs.
SeaMonkey,
Are you sure we are not on the gold standard?
SeaMonkey:
We haven't been on the gold standard since Nixon.
We have a "fiat money" system now...well almost. The only thing that keeps it from being a true fiat system is that our dollar is still backed by a precious resource....it just isn't gold.
Legally speaking it is a fiat system and not a gold standard.
Here are some links that span the political gamut of pro and con, but everyone agrees, the gold standard was put to bed by FDR and killed by Nixon.
http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/wallenwein/2004/0616.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/sennholz1.html
http://www.a1-guide-to-gold-investments.com/sample4.html
http://www.calicocat.com/2004/06/libertarians-and-gold-standard.html
And here is Allan Greenspan on the pros and cons of going back to the gold standard:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/greenspan011098.html
How Stuff Works has a great...if overly simplified....article on how our currency works:
http://money.howstuffworks.com/currency7.htm
The thing to know about their article is, that what they describe WOULD be true, if OPEC didn't accept dollars exclusively, in exchange for oil. The fact that OPEC has this agreement with us, is the one reason that the dollar floats. Everyone that uses oil, has to come to us for dollars. It's that simple.
That is why Russia is in Iran, and why we want them out. It is why the French and Germans starved Iraq for profit. It is why we went to war. It is why Democrats let us go to war. It is why we didn't go after the Saudis. It is the gravity well that keeps these other events in motion.
I wouldn't post on a subject I wasn't overly educated on. LOL
(I forget what number that is.)
DrewKaree:
Go with #3....you can always claim #5 if that doesn't go over well ;) ;D
Crazy Cooter:
Child porn = bad. We all agree on that.
Abu Gharib = bad. Most of us agree on that.
To say the UN (as a whole) is bad because it happened is the same arguement that was made about Abu Gharib. People say that the US (as a whole) is bad because that happened. I *think* what the difference may be, is that it's felt that Abu Gharib is seen as purposely done (the acts, coverups are everywhere).
IMO, the whole lot of them from both topics should be locked up. Put them in the same prison and they can play together.