U.N. takes SOME steps, at least (formerly - where's the equivalent outrage)

[DrewKaree]

Abu Gharib is plastered all over the headlines while THIS barely makes news or is commented on?

Why is there no equal outrage and stories implying that Kofi Annon knew of this and was implicit in the program's creation like all the "this administration had to know" cries we heard?

Where is the outrage over the U.N. not only ignoring this, but trying to cover this up?  Before you respond, look for stories about this happening as far back as 2001, reported again in 2002, and on and on and on.  This CLEARLY has been covered up, and the U.N. and it's "self-investigation" practices demonstrate the utter corruption of this organization is rife with.

THAT is the organization we were supposed to be listening to when deciding to go into Iraq?  THAT is the organization that was responsible for ignoring the Iraqi people that aid programs were supposed to be helping, all for the sake of oil?

Yeah, and the U.S. are the a-holes

[mr.Curmudgeon]

YEEEEEEEEAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGH!!!!!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


There's some outrage. Happy now?
mrC

P.S. Even though it pisses you off every time I tell you, you do realize that your post represents another "Straw man" argument, don't you? 'Cuz whether or not anyone is outraged enough for you over alleged atrocities committed under the auspices of the U.N., neither negates, justifies, or explains away atrocities committed by our OWN government.

[fredster]

MrC

"straw man arguement"?

This is key Mr.Chuckles. Key. This proves that there was compliance from all levels of the UN to release Saddam from his "sanction prison".  What do you think he would have done once those sanctions were lifted? 

It further invalidates any "appeal" to the UN for any international crisis. It proves that no matter what we asked the UN to do, the cards were stacked against us.  It proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the UN is corrupt.

There is no question.  It's an absolute fact.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

"straw man arguement"?

Yeah.

Drew's post purports that somehow, the fact that abuse occurred under the auspices of the U.N., they are somehow more important than those that occurred under the auspices of the U.S., that they somehow TOTALLY validate waging a preemptive war without the broad support of a truly multi-lateral coalition. He hasn't said that outright, but it's right there between the lines.

At best this incident makes the U.N. as bad as the U.S given correlating instances....nothing more, nothing less. If he asks where's the "equal" outrage, I'd say to him...yeah, were you equally as outraged by the atrocities committed in America's name in Abu Gharib? If so, why do you continue to support a president that REWARDED that failure (ie: Rumsfeld) and further encourages a policy of torture and abuse (ie: John "Contra" Negroponte / Attorney General Alberto "Suspension of Geneva Conventions" Gonzales)??

"It proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the UN is corrupt."
...

... it's "self-investigation" practices demonstrate the utter corruption of this organization is rife with.

Again, follow through with that logic............please.

Apply it to what we've got here, in the Good Ole' U.S. of A.....

"But that task is now way beyond the purview of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which held important hearings on prisoner abuse. Republican Congressional leaders have made it painfully clear that they will not hold a real investigation. And no inquiry by the executive branch can be credible because the stain of prisoner abuse spreads so far. The Justice Department can't do it; Attorney General Alberto Gonzales was part of the problem."

Add to that, as mentioned above, John Negroponte (Iran/Contra funding, cover up of human rights abuses carried out by CIA-trained operatives in Honduras in the 1980s) has now been tapped for National Intelligence Director and we've got NO ROOM to complain about the abuses meted out by other nations.

Stop the abuses happening in your own backyard, before pointing to that which occurs in that of others. Frankly, I care more about what the U.S. does than the U.N, it's as simple as that...and in order of 'outrage' priority.

If these allegations are true, then obviously, those responsible should he held accountable.

But even given that, the abuse that occurred at Abu Gharib, and those continuing at Gitmo,  SHOULD be plastered all over the U.S. news, and we all, as Americans, should be ashamed. We ARE NOT A NATION OF TORTURE. As for this particular fiasco invalidating any "appeal" to the U.N....I guess you could say the same about the U.S. then, huh? We've got more than a few 'atrocities' under our belt too.



mrC

[SeaMonkey]

The U.N. wants oil to trade for basketed currency. The US has OPEC locked into using dollars only to sell oil. Now the other countries had a back door with the oil for food program, so they abused the be-jesus out of it. Our dollar was losing ground as a result, since the OPEC deal essentially makes the dollar backed by oil, so we went to war.

The argument you two are having ignores what is really going on. The UN corruption and the war in Iraq are just symptoms of the disease.

The real question is, do you want our dollar to collaps or not? Who's side are you on? Right or wrong, if oil goes to basketed currency, our dollar will be backed by nothing other than Greenspan's signature.

Even with the war, we have only put off the inevitable. Peak oil production will be here and gone in 40 years, at which point, if the dollar is still backed by oil, inflation will bust our economy.

[fredster]

But even given that, the abuse that occurred at Abu Gharib, and those continuing at Gitmo,  SHOULD be plastered all over the U.S. news, and we all, as Americans, should be ashamed.

  MrC, war is hell. There are lots of young and stupid people everywhere.  Put 300,000 people in one place and you can bet somebody is going to do something stupid.  Work at a factory or large manufacturing facility and you'll see things like than in a lot smaller population. People are people, not robots.

Your position is that the problem is systemic. I seem to get the impression it's pervasive in the Military and in the Governement.

Are we a nation of torture? I don't see these people being branded, mangled, and beheaded.  I see them being walked around by guards.  This is a NEW war that can't be played by PC systems designed for shoplifters.

These people are trying to kill us.  They aren't trying to change our ideas, they aren't trying to protest, they are trying to kill us. They don't care who they kill or how. They are fanatics of the highest order.  The standard "Good Cop / Bad Cop" won't work on them, they are going to fight to the death, and apparently they don't care which one.

If they took out your family, you might think differently. The administation is making decisions. Any decision made by authority figures is second guessed by everybody in every peanut gallery in the world.  I was a supervisor in a UAW plant, and I couldn't believe the reaction of people over the simplist things.  When you are in a position of authority, there is no quarter. 

Maybe one day you will have some responsiblity for other people and over other people and you can understand.

Keep in mind that what you call "failure" Lots and Lots of other people call a wild Success.  Mistakes were made, and I'm defending Rumsfeld, but I wouldn't want to be in his shoes for any amount of time good news or bad.

As for this particular fiasco invalidating any "appeal" to the U.N....I guess you could say the same about the U.S. then, huh? We've got more than a few 'atrocities' under our belt too.

This "hate America first" attitude isn't serving any of us. We have to band together behind the government and discuss the issues. Not sit outside the capital building with a sign that says "The world is ending - I told you so".

Every Country on every inch of this planet has "atrocities".  Not one race is immune from some type of atrocity. The good thing about America is that we try to correct them.  Just because the USA has had problems in it's past doens't invalidate the goal we are trying to achieve, whether you see that in your view or not.

It certainly doesn't discredit us that we have.  The Bush administration was cleaning up a problem before we had to go to a world war. The Congress of the United Stated backed him by law. The people of the United States backed their president.

The people of Iran are building a fresh country, and we have given them the best tools and the best support that any nation on the face of the earth could.  Removing Saddam was not a mistake, not trusting or utilizing the United Nations was not a mistake, and trying to protect the US from terrorists is not a mistake.

[Crazy Cooter]

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...

[danny_galaga]

The real question is, do you want our dollar to collaps or not?

yes, euros look prettier

Who's side are you on?

gods

Right or wrong, if oil goes to basketed currency, our dollar will be backed by nothing other than Greenspan's signature.

it's not now?

Even with the war, we have only put off the inevitable. Peak oil production will be here and gone in 40 years, at which point, if the dollar is still backed by oil, inflation will bust our economy.

yep, so why delay the inevitable?

[fredster]

I'm not for certain that the devaluation of the dollar is a bad thing.

It does some good for the economy. It makes our goods cheaper overseas. We sell more. It also affects the way we pay off the National debt in benifical ways I have heard on NPR. The downside is it reduces our ability to borrow from foreign exchanges. 

We are still on the gold standard aren't we?  Oil isn't a standard for oil anywhere that I know of.

What are the two top producers of oil in the world? First is Saudi Arabia, and second is the United States. Yes, the United States out produces Iraq, by 2X.  We can out produce the Saudis at peak intervals.

But, I'm not an economist either.  There are lots of factors, not just one factor.  If the middle east suddenly stoped producing oil, we wouldn't die. We have lots of Oil on this side of the world, untapped, we can tap into.

[SeaMonkey]

No, we left the gold standard in 1965.

There is NOTHING other than OPEC's agreement to only sell oil for dollars, giving our greenback any value at all.

Fractional banking, while still referred to by the FED, (not a branch of the government by the way, the Federal Reserve Bank is owned by its member banks.) is not how we have this much money printed.

Oil can be bought from OPEC only if you have dollars.

Non-oil producing countries, such as most underdeveloped countries and Japan, first have to sell their goods to earn dollars with which they can purchase oil.

If they cannot earn enough dollars, then they have to borrow dollars from the Wold Bank, which have to be paid back, with interest, in DOLLARS.  (heh)

This creates the huge demand for dollars outside the U.S.

However, the U.S. only has to print dollar bills in exchange for goods. Even for its own oil imports, the U.S. can print dollar bills without exporting or selling its goods.

For instance, in 2003 the current U.S. account deficit and external debt has been running at more than $500 billion. Put in simple terms, the U.S. will receive $500 billion more in goods and services from other countries than it will provide them, by sheer virtue of the dollar being backed by Saudi Oil.

Why didn't we go after the Saudi's after 911?
We can't! They are the key to our monetary system!

Why did we go after Iraq after 911?
Oil for food rip offs were pulling our economy down, and Iraq was not part of OPEC. France, Germany, and Russia were reaping huge dividends by ripping off the starving folks in Iraq.

[DrewKaree]

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...

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 

[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.

[DrewKaree]

To say the UN (as a whole) is bad because it happened is the same arguement that was made about Abu Gharib. 

I agree wholeheartedly with that statement, however, there are/were people who wished to imply or just flat out say that exact thing re: the prisoners, and their silence in this child abuse speaks volumes to me.

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).

I can see your point, but there are records of this being reported as far back as 2001 (possibly further, I've not been able to find anything farther back than that), people got fired VERY soon after alerting their superiors to it, and even now, Kofi Annan is mum on the subject, and the only reason it's getting ANY ink is that a Human Rights organization did their own investigation, and 20/20, of all the journalistic hotbeds for a scoop, did some investigation.  If the argument was made that Abu Gharib was a systemic problem, then it's reasonable to assume that something that's been going on for twice as long and been referenced often enough for there to be a trail (however faint it is) leading back that long that this clearly is beyond the scope of any cover-up that might have been done by Rumsfeld.

IMO, the whole lot of them from both topics should be locked up.  Put them in the same prison and they can play together.

I disagree with capital punishment, but child abuse of this type could tip the scales depending on the day and how evil I'm feeling.  As a dad, I hope I'm never in the situation where I even have to contemplate how someone who might have done this to my kids should be treated.

On your solution, I wish there were more that could be done, but I agree with you.

[DarkKobold]

When do we get to see the DrewKaree and Mr. C steel cage match on PPV?

I, for one, would be willing to pay.

--- DREAM SEQUENCE---
Tonight, in the ring, we have two poster childern for opposing political parties. Each come in with a poltical post number so high, Paige Oliver is threatened by their nonsenical and biased ranting. In the red corner, wearing red shorts, weighting in at 2600 posts, We have Drew Karee. Drew Karee ranges from political posts longer than the consitution to random posts that consist of words shortened by 2 or 3 syllables, making them incomprehensible. He is a poster child for George W. Bush, and is rumored to be carrying his child.
In the blue corner wearing daaark blue shorts, we have Mr. Curmudgeon, a lover of fine Heinz Ketchup, and weighting it at 770 posts. A fan boy of the democratic party, post consists of angry banter that is ready to explode at the next republican idea. It is rumored that he helped Monica Lewinsky in her "service" to the President.
These two fighters are raring and ready to go. LET'S GET READY TO RUUUMMMMMBBBBLLLLLEEEEEEE!
---END SEQUENCE----

Note: This post is meant as a joke, and only a joke. Please don't take any of it seriously. Seriously.  

[danny_galaga]

i take that very seriously!! when i lived in vancouver a whole bunch of us backpackers put up some money to see mike tyson on PPV in his comeback bout. lasted how many seconds? what a rip-off!! i reckon 'dangerous' drew karee and 'crazy' curmudgeon would put on a great show! i'd pay double 

[Dexter]

Human rights abuses happening elsewhere doesn't diminish the ones committed by the US Drew. Even if this story received MORE coverage than whats going on in Iraq and Gitmo, not a single act of torture by US armed forces will be lessened, nor should it be.

The fact that you feel hard done by because your countries abuses received more publicity than the UNs says it all really.

Want to state that ALL abuses are a disgrace and shouldn't happen, or are the ones committed in the name of your security acceptable?

[shmokes]

To be technical, Drew's specific logical fallacy is an ad hominem tuquoque (or maybe circumstantial), I believe.  I don't think it's a straw man.

But yeah...anybody at the U.N. involved with this should hang, and presumably if there is a high level French official in the U.N. who is involved he is getting slaughtered by the French press.

But it's pretty normal, as an American, to be more concerned with the actions of fellow Americans than of others.  I mean, do you give a damn who Tony Blair sleeps with?  Are you going to demand that Ken Starr go over and investigate it?

In the end, though, I find this post a bit disingenuous.  I have no doubt that you are personally outraged by the behavior of people in the U.N., but you didn't just post a link and say, "Look at this attrocious behavoir."   You posted a link and said, "See, how can y'all criticize Abu Gharib and Gitmo?  Look what THESE guys are doing."  But the moral reprehensibility of an act, in my opinion, is unrelated to how many other people are committing similarly abominable acts. 

And if I'm less (un)aware of bad behavior that is going on outside of America, or more concerned with the behavior of Americans well.....that's kind of normal.  It's sort of like, you might see the teenage girl next door who is going out, scantily clad, on a daily basis with a group of boys and staying out until all hours of the night on school nights.  This behavior would trouble you, I'm sure.  But if you started seeing the same behavior from your own daughter I would imagine that you would be both more concerned and more active in trying to find a solution.

And I think it would be equally disingenuous of your daughter, when confronted, to say, "Dad, look at Cindy next door.  She's been doing this for years.  Where's the equialent outrage?"


p.s.  I got the package.  Thanks.

[Dartful Dodger]

I don't care what the UN thinks or does.
Give me my free oil.

[Fat_Trucker]

Been quite a lot of coverage on it over here in blighty.

[Crazy Cooter]

... and the only reason it's getting ANY ink is that a Human Rights organization did their own investigation...

 
Where's Drew?  I see Waldo but no Drew... Wait... I see a bleeding heart... Drew?

When was the 20/20 episode on?  I missed it.  And where/what is blighty?  I shouldn't have slept through geography... or high school for that matter.

[DrewKaree]

I believe it was two fridays ago...not quite sure....snow removal makes my days hard to remember accurately for a while.

Check out ABC's site, I think they have archives of 20/20 stuff, mebbe a listing of what was on the show, ala Trading Spaces / The New Yankee Workshop / Michael Holligan

I was gonna ask the same Q about blighty...sounds like a disease of trees or something.

*edit*

(My reply whenever someone says they're bleeding)

That bleeding heart....don't worry, just tie a tourniquet around the neck, that'll stop the bleeding in a little bit.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Note: This post is meant as a joke, and only a joke. Please don't take any of it seriously. Seriously. 

"But don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter." - Napoleon Dynamite


mrC
P.S.  I thought your post was funny. I'm fully aware of how "spirited" I come off in this forum. 

[DrewKaree]

While it's just a handful of people, at least they've started to do SOMETHING about it.

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/nation/11163446.htm

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Damn it...I was just planning on rioting in the streets. Looks like I'll have to reshedule.


mrC

[JCL]

I don't get the question or at least think the implication makes no sense.

The US's bad actions can't be excused just because the UN is a lousy corrupt organisation.

I care much more about my own nation than I care about the UN. I care a lot that the US is torturing people and sending people to other countries to be tortured. I care a lot that the US is essentially kidnapping people and is depriving people of US citizenship illegally. I care a lot that the US invades other countries on false premises.

The fact that there are other bad things in the world is irrelevent. If you really love this country, you should be horrified at how far she is moving away from her principles.

[APFelon]

I don't get the question or at least think the implication makes no sense.

The US's bad actions can't be excused just because the UN is a lousy corrupt organisation.

I don't think that is the point. I think the point is that the other "bad actions" aren't getting the press that the US's "bad actions" get.

I care much more about my own nation than I care about the UN. I care a lot that the US is torturing people and sending people to other countries to be tortured. I care a lot that the US is essentially kidnapping people and is depriving people of US citizenship illegally. I care a lot that the US invades other countries on false premises.

The US had a casus beli against Iraq since 1991. As for that other stuff, it's a cruel, cruel world out there. Sainted nations don't remain nations for long. Asking the US to behave like angels is essentially like asking the US to play geopolitical games with one hand tied behind its back.

The world is not a hornet's nest, where if you leave it alone it'll leave you alone. So, as a nation, we need to decide whether to act or be acted upon. Should we do nothing if US assets are seized and nationalized by various countries? Maybe, maybe not. Should we trade with nationstates regardless of their human rights records or their belligerent attitudes towards other nations? Perhaps, perhaps not. Should we withdraw all of our military back to our own country and let the chips fall where they may? Who knows? But rest assured, the prosperity of the United States is hinged on our willingness to use force when the situation requires it. The prosperity of other nations depend on it as well. So ask yourself: do I value my comfortable lifestyle, do I enjoy the luxuries that sit in my garage and in my home, and would I be willing to sacrifice them if my country decides to become altruistic?

As a hypothetical, let's say that the US decides to demilitarize the Pacific Rim and promises not to send any military forces to the area regardless of what happens. China instantly annexes Taiwan and executes every pro-independence politician, professor, and intellectual. North Korea sends waves of troops over the DMZ and occupies and annexes South Korea. The Philipines breaks into a full-fledged religious civil war. How would that affect you? 

The entire region would be a mess. American businesses would take a hit, and the cost of tech, rubber, textiles would skyrocket. An unstable region is bad for business, and this would affect the price of nearly everything else on the world market.

So, take that as you may. It's a worldwide market, and markets love stability. The US military maintains that stability, and I would argue that the world now is more harmonious now than it has ever been due to the US's threat of force.

Is that worth it so that folks can sit in an oil heated home, typing on an Internet forum happily as they dream about their MAME cabinets, car nestled in their garage so they can drive to their job that pays an obscene amount of money (compared to the world's average salaries), chatter away on the latest Cellular phone with cameras built in about some guy who was caught shelling a hospital is now in a military prison, forced to wear panties on his head?

Yes, the world is indeed cruel. And the safety, security, prosperity and general wellness of the US and other western nations shelter the population to that fact. We have the luxury to wring our hands about that mean ol' Scott Peterson who dumped his dead wife in the ocean just a few short years after African rivers were choked with war causalities and execution victims. We can lament the fact that Iraqi prisoners had to make a naked human pyramid while entire ethnic populations are executed en masse. We can weep about immigrants being deported from our shores while the farmers in Zimbabwe are being marched out of their homes by gunpoint. The luxury to cry of lesser evils, what a luxury it is! Oh, the US, so cruel. So cruel in a cruel, cruel world. Must we live up to some bizarre international standard that has been set only for the United States? Maybe we should.

If we want to maintain our masturbatory lifestyles, we must remain cruel. I think we can become less cruel as soon as cruelty is driven from humanity. I don't know about you, but I won't hold my breath.

The fact that there are other bad things in the world is irrelevant. If you really love this country, you should be horrified at how far she is moving away from her principles.

And what, precisely, are these principles, and when, precisely, did we live up to them? A week in May, 1977? Even a cursory look at US history reveals constant warfare, exploitation, inequality, racial hatred, slavery, etc, etc, etc... travesties of history committed even by statesmen who wrote that they hated slavery and that the US should not become engaged in foreign entanglements. I thought dreaming of a fictional past was reserved for flag-waving conservatives. However, it's consistant with the belief that the US should have a castrated foreign policy and handle world affairs like Jesus would.

Anyway, welcome to the forum. We offer other topics like arcade controls, monitors, and various arcade-related issues. Enjoy your stay.

APf

[JCL]

I don't think that is the point. I think the point is that the other "bad actions" aren't getting the press that the US's "bad actions" get.

This stuff is in the news. As are a million other things. But we (the US) don't control and aren't responsible for the UN. Bringing up the UN in this context is just saying "We're not so bad, look at what they did!"

It's a ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow--- argument that doesn't work for six year olds and certainly shouldn't work for nations.

As for that other stuff, it's a cruel, cruel world out there. Sainted nations don't remain nations for long. Asking the US to behave like angels is essentially like asking the US to play geopolitical games with one hand tied behind its back.

The world is not a hornet's nest, where if you leave it alone it'll leave you alone.

Really. How was Iraq going to attack the US? With the fictitious Weapons of Mass Destruction?

You want to know how to cure Islamic Terrorism? Stop supporting the horrible corrupt nations in the Middle East!

Stop giving them billions for oil. Stop proping up dictatorships, police states, and theocracies. Without the oil money the corrupt nations are powerless. Without the support of the US, Saddam would probably not been dictator of Iraq. If he was a threat, it was because the US helped him. We helped him get into power and we made damn sure he stayed in power.

Of course the real terrorist threat is from which nations? Where did the hijackers of 9/11 come from? Fifteen of the nineteen were from our ally Saudi Arabia. Thank goodness we are so friendly with that theocratic hellhole. Lets not forget the fact that the Taliban would likely never have been in power in Afghanstan providing a safe haven for Al Queada had it not been for the US supporting them too.

Of course, the leader of Al Qeada is still out there because Iraq was so much more important than finishing the job in Afghanistan.

I wonder how many nuclear plants one could build for the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on invading Iraq? I wonder how much research could have been done on energy self-sufficiency could have been done with that money? The Apollo program could have been funded several times over with that kind of money. The Manhattan Project cost a tiny fraction of the Iraq Adventure.

But I'm sure we are much safer today. Except for the fifteen hundred dead US soldiers and the many thousands of crippled ones. And I'm sure we are much better off with the National Guard under such severe strain.

And I'm sure its better that the

[DrewKaree]

This stuff is in the news. As are a million other things. But we (the US) don't control and aren't responsible for the UN. Bringing up the UN in this context is just saying "We're not so bad, look at what they did!"

It's a <auto-censored> argument that doesn't work for six year olds and certainly shouldn't work for nations.

This stuff IS in the news?  BS.  The story I brought up has gone on for years right under Annan's nose.  I can count on one hand the amount of stories I've been able to find about this, and if that's your idea of "coverage", you've got some wacky standards 

You say the argument shouldn't work for nations, yet the mass murders committed by Sadaam not only were treated with that same six year old's argument, but were treated comparitively almost as if they never happened.  Whatever exposure they DID recieve was dropped like a hot potato once there was a way to impugn the military as a whole for the actions of a few rogue members.

Everything else you've offered is a scattergun approach to replying to a rather direct and pointed response aimed at addressing just a few of your initial points, so while I was going to respond to many of them, it seems foolish to give you pointed responsed that will only engender further shotgun blasts of craplets.

The only point you bring up that should be addressed is: "How's that premise working for Israel?"

Thus far, it seems to be working for them, as they haven't been turned into a grease spot in the desert.  Thinking Israel is the problem ignores the efforts to wipe them off the face of the earth thus far, and simply wishes to pin the hopes of peace on a pie-in-the-sky plan of "talks".

[JCL]

This stuff IS in the news?

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Is isn't in the news? You quoted the so called MSM about the story! Google news has many hundreds of stories about this situation from many dozens of media outlets. 

JCL,

Drew's interest in this case seems to me to be disingenuous at best. I really get the sense that his call for "equivalent outrage" derives more from his desire to see the U.N. shamed - since that seems to be the current going game on the right - than from his desire to actually see justice done in this case.

Now I'm not saying he doesn't really care about this victims, just that he probably cares more about how negatively this reflects on the U.N., which is apparent to me by how he continually extrapolates this behavior and uses it to paint the entire organization as corrupt because of it. Contrast that with how he probably still clings to the theory of "a few bad apples" when it comes to Abu Gharib and you see how transparent his "outrage" really is.

His reasoning that this story should be of equal importance domestically in the U.S. with the Abu Gharib story, belies the fact that it neither involves the U.S. nor did it occur under it's auspices. Which WAS the case with the Iraqi Prison deaths, rapes, beatings and tortures. Is this story newsworthy? YES! Is it somehow *more* newsworthy than the Abu Gharib/Gitmo tortures? NO. Not if you really care about the tenants of our freedoms and the very spirit of our nation.

It's always easier to blame others for their wrongful deeds than to except responsibility for our own.

mrC

[fredster]

MrC,

This Abu Gharib situation proves nothing.  Google search about prisioner abuse in the good o'le USA on Americans. The environment itself takes good people and turns them into idiots here without any military training.

It's not systemic.  I can tell you were never in the Military. It is obvious that all these people on the "systemic" side NEVER served. You don't know the rules and the conduct.  What we have here is a severe breakdown of dicipline, that's all. It happens when there are people involved in anything.

The military definiation of dicipline is "to do the right thing based on the rules of conduct even when no one directs you to do so".

That didn't happen with these idiots at this prison.  People at Gitmo are fighting going back to their home country now because they are afraid they will be "tortured".  They want to stay. That's funny, I thought they were being "tortured". http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7829901&src=rss/topNews

The UN matter is at the crux of the Saddam regieme change.  If the UN was being paid, and paid big, then should they be trusted to decide if it's right or wrong to do anything?  The orgainzation had deep problems.  If this was the US adminstation and this type of money was being passed, what would we say then?

His reasoning that this story should be of equal importance domestically in the U.S. with the Abu Gharib story, belies the fact that it neither involves the U.S. nor did it occur under it's auspices. Which WAS the case with the Iraqi Prison deaths, rapes, beatings and tortures. Is this story newsworthy? YES! Is it somehow *more* newsworthy than the Abu Gharib/Gitmo tortures? NO. Not if you really care about the tenants of our freedoms and the very spirit of our nation.

Did you note that the source of these investigations is the US govenment itself?  They are the ones uncovering and investigating and fixing these problems.  You know what that means?  The system works. 

You can't hold people to the impossible standard of perfection. They are doing as perfect a job as humans can do in this undertaking.  In every war we have serious mistakes that coulda shoulda been avoided if people were machines, but they are not. They are people and they make mistakes.

This has been one of the cleanest operations in US/World history. The UN has blood on it's hands in it's inaction.  The US has reshaped the Middle east and has probably stopped the flow of money and support for terrorists for a generation.  It has freed more people and given hope to people who had no hope. Is that important?  YES, if you really care about the tenants of our freedoms and the very spirit of our nation