|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:03 pm Post subject: The UN is broken |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Most members, led by the U.S. and Japanese ambassadors, wanted an immediate and robust condemnation of the launch in that initial statement. But the Chinese and Russian envoys are said to have resisted, with at least one member balking at a statement that would even express "concern" over the launch, according to a Western diplomat. |
China, Russia, and France needs to be booted off the permanent UN security Council. Bring in Japan, Brazil, and India to replace them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No, but there should be no veto power. The irony is that the strongest states have the veto power and are least in need of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CyberGuy
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Location: Daejeon, Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:35 pm Post subject: Re: The UN is broken |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most members, led by the U.S. and Japanese ambassadors, wanted an immediate and robust condemnation of the launch in that initial statement. But the Chinese and Russian envoys are said to have resisted, with at least one member balking at a statement that would even express "concern" over the launch, according to a Western diplomat. |
China, Russia, and France needs to be booted off the permanent UN security Council. Bring in Japan, Brazil, and India to replace them. |
The only country which should be kicked out of UN is United States of America and everything will start to run normal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sokocanuck21
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Location: Ansan
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 10:34 pm Post subject: Re: The UN is broken |
|
|
| CyberGuy wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most members, led by the U.S. and Japanese ambassadors, wanted an immediate and robust condemnation of the launch in that initial statement. But the Chinese and Russian envoys are said to have resisted, with at least one member balking at a statement that would even express "concern" over the launch, according to a Western diplomat. |
China, Russia, and France needs to be booted off the permanent UN security Council. Bring in Japan, Brazil, and India to replace them. |
The only country which should be kicked out of UN is United States of America and everything will start to run normal. |
너ㅣ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 1:19 am Post subject: Re: The UN is broken |
|
|
| CyberGuy wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most members, led by the U.S. and Japanese ambassadors, wanted an immediate and robust condemnation of the launch in that initial statement. But the Chinese and Russian envoys are said to have resisted, with at least one member balking at a statement that would even express "concern" over the launch, according to a Western diplomat. |
China, Russia, and France needs to be booted off the permanent UN security Council. Bring in Japan, Brazil, and India to replace them. |
The only country which should be kicked out of UN is United States of America and everything will start to run normal. |
What a load. Run normal? If the US wasnt in the UN thered be no one to counter balance the way rogue/balless nations have controlled it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChopChaeJoe
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think this is a stupid issue. NK is a country at war. A country, any country, at war has the need to build the best weapons it can. Until a peace agreement is signed all is fair in love and war. Would any country do otherwise?
NK's insanity lies not in building better missle technology, but in not seeking peace in parallel with it's brothers and sisters to the south. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:05 am Post subject: Re: The UN is broken |
|
|
| CyberGuy wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most members, led by the U.S. and Japanese ambassadors, wanted an immediate and robust condemnation of the launch in that initial statement. But the Chinese and Russian envoys are said to have resisted, with at least one member balking at a statement that would even express "concern" over the launch, according to a Western diplomat. |
China, Russia, and France needs to be booted off the permanent UN security Council. Bring in Japan, Brazil, and India to replace them. |
The only country which should be kicked out of UN is United States of America and everything will start to run normal. |
As a United States citizen, I personally would love it if the United States simply abandoned the United Nations. The United States supplies 22% of the United Nation's budget (and the only reason it doesn't provide more is because regulations prevent it), and in return all it ends up with is a platform upon which nations that oppose US interests pontificate upon.
The fact that Cyberguy seems to consider the United States ethically inferior and more worthy of blame than Russia is very interesting, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beej
Joined: 05 Mar 2005
Location: Eungam Loop
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:11 am Post subject: Re: The UN is broken |
|
|
| CyberGuy wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Most members, led by the U.S. and Japanese ambassadors, wanted an immediate and robust condemnation of the launch in that initial statement. But the Chinese and Russian envoys are said to have resisted, with at least one member balking at a statement that would even express "concern" over the launch, according to a Western diplomat. |
China, Russia, and France needs to be booted off the permanent UN security Council. Bring in Japan, Brazil, and India to replace them. |
The only country which should be kicked out of UN is United States of America and everything will start to run normal. |
Most Americans would love to leave the UN, bring all troops home, disengage from all international affairs and just let the chips fall where they may. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChopChaeJoe
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
As silly as the UN is, there really is no other international forum to take it's place. We do live in a massively interconnected world. Nationalism has it's place. So does internationalism.
I'm all for bringing the troops home though. Iraq and Afghanistan were both big,big mistakes. I can understand Afghanistan - heat of the moment and all, but such a thing as too much fun. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChopChaeJoe wrote: |
| As silly as the UN is, there really is no other international forum to take it's place. |
No such international forum is necessary. All necessary and valuable communication can happen directly nation to nation.
| ChopChaeJoe wrote: |
| We do live in a massively interconnected world. Nationalism has it's place. So does internationalism. |
Agreed. You can have internationalism and internationalist sentiment without the UN though. In fact, it would be hard to avoid, since as you say, we live in a massively interconnected world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChopChaeJoe
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
However, there are rarely only two nations in need of dealing with one another. And what is happening in one country will have an effect on countries around the world whether they want it to or not. WWI was started in a faraway city of Sarejevo. WWII by Japan taking Korea (in the Pacific) and by Germany annexing a sliver of Chechoslvokia and by Italy making an ill-fated invasion (at least at first) in Ethiopia. all of these things are connected and not by a nation-to-nation thread.
The levels of interconnection are nowadays orders of magnatudes more complex. To say that no international forum is neccessary requires a pretty herculean defense in my opinion. That defies logic, common sense, and history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChopChaeJoe wrote: |
| However, there are rarely only two nations in need of dealing with one another. |
Direct nation to nation talks can happen between multiple nations at once. It simply involves representatives of all the nations in questions gathering at a predetermined locale and talking. Acting as if this would be impossible or even difficult without the UN in existence is odd.
| ChopChaeJoe wrote: |
| The levels of interconnection are nowadays orders of magnatudes more complex. To say that no international forum is neccessary requires a pretty herculean defense in my opinion. That defies logic, common sense, and history. |
No dedicated international forum is necessary precisely because we are, as you say, so interconnected. Any finite number of nations can have representatives of their interests gather whenever they wish to discuss whateve they wish, that's the simple truth. If a problem exists that the US, Canada, Japan, and Australia for some reason need to discuss, it's very easy to have a 4 way talk; the UN isn't needed to accommodate that at all.
Further, because of the immense data-spreading power of the global media, the one benefit a dedicated international forum might have -- i.e. announcements to the entire world -- is rendered useless, as the global media is far more effective at it.
You make an obviously true claim: the nations of the world are strongly interconnected. You draw from that a very questionable conclusion: that an international forum such as the UN is required because of that interconnectedness. The fact that any finite number of nations can gather to discuss whatever they wish obliviates the need for such a forum though, and the UN as it stands is an ineffectual body, a waste of money being given by my and other countries, and an organization that -- because of it's system for decisions -- tends to misrepresent global opinon anyway due to the fact that powerful countries inexplicably have veto powers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Otherside
Joined: 06 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChopChaeJoe wrote: |
WWII by Japan taking Korea (in the Pacific) and by Germany annexing a sliver of Chechoslvokia and by Italy making an ill-fated invasion (at least at first) in Ethiopia. all of these things are connected and not by a nation-to-nation thread.
|
Wow...
Japan took Korea BEFORE WW1. So I don't see how that can be a cause of WW2? (Maybe you meant Manchuria?)
Your other 2 examples were involved in the run-up, but definitly weren't the actual causes. (I believe the straw which broke the camel's back was the German invasion of Poland). Italy's invasion of Ethiopia was a couple of years before WW2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ilsanman
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Location: Bucheon, Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The US should abandon the UN, as should every country. It is a useless organization, which was just shown this weekend when NK launched the rocket and all the UN did was shake their fingers at them harder.
The US provides the land and 22% of their budget and Ban has the gall to call U a 'deadbeat nation'. He deserves to lose his job for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChopChaeJoe
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Otherwise,
Why do you think the cause of World War II can not come before WWII? You could trace the whole thing back to the fall of the Roman Empire if you really wanted to. More apropos would be Teddy Roosevelts peace-making between Russia and japan back in, what, 1902? Japan would not have made the inroads into Manchuria (which it named Manchukuo) if not for what it did to Korea. In fact, the colonization of Korea enabled massive industrialization of Japan since it freed them from much of the need to produce food.
you can call the beginning of WWII any old arbitrary date, but by 1933 it was a reality. By 1935 unavoidable to continue, and by 1939 destined to remake the New World Ordeer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
