|
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 |
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| Washington DC, Apr 18 (OneWorld) - International human rights groups yesterday expressed disappointment with the failure of the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC), currently meeting in Geneva, to approve strong condemnations of the governments of Cuba, Sudan, Russia, and several other countries |
| Quote: |
HRW charged said this year's disappointments were due primarily to what it called a growing bloc of repressive governments--including Algeria, China, Cuba, Libya (which chaired this year's Commission), Sudan, Syria, and Zimbabwe--that have become more aggressive in blocking or defeating critical resolutions. In addition, it noted that African countries had voted as a bloc to hold off action against Zimbabwe and--with the exception of Uganda, which abstained--against the Sudan resolution.
Which is then followed up with the usual "it's all America's fault" in the subsequent paragraph. Come on, folks, the UNHRC is a joke, it was chaired by Libya! And in 2001, the Europeans quite gleefully allowed the U.S. to be knocked off the commission for SUDAN for crying out loud. When some of the world's biggest violators of Human Rights are allowed to not only be voting members but to chair the commission, you get what you paid for |
.
Who is next North Korea? Well they might be on the UN Human rights in the future no joke. Well Sad to say the UN often is.
see below.
| Quote: |
Anger at UN role for rights violators
Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor
Monday April 21, 2003
The Guardian
Human rights organisations are protesting at the inclusion of countries with some of the worst records of abuses on a list of candidates for election to the main United Nations watchdog.
North Korea, Iran and Nigeria are likely to win membership of the UN Commission on Human Rights in an election either at the end of this month or early next. Egypt is another candidate and, even though its abuses are not on the same scale as the others, it has been conducting a vigorous campaign against homosexuals. |
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,11538,940557,00.html
Wasn't the UN on Saddam's payroll? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're trying to say something about human rights? I'm sorry, but i don't quite follow what you're getting at.
You're a supporter of human rights, or do you feel this is something that is conditional & can justifiably be compromised?
Also, how are your comments meant to be in response to what i posted? They are aren't they?
Clarify please.
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| ALGERIA is the 'winner' of an alternative world cup - for the worst abuser of human rights. The garland of dishonour emerges from findings in The Observer's Human Rights Index, launched today to mark the 50th anniversary of t he Universal Declaration of Human Rights. |
Algeria's place at the head of the abusers' list was earned through its record for torture and extrajudicial killings - numbering 80,000 since the military junta cancelled democratic elections in 1992.
| Quote: |
Behind Algeria, on a score of 110.55, come North Korea, Burma, Indonesia, Libya, Colombia, Syria, Iraq, Yugoslavia and China. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and Nigeria follow closely. The United Kingdom comes 141st; a good score on a global basis but not so admirable when compared with other rich, industrialised countries - we are seventh out of 23.
The 'loser' - the country where recorded abuse of human rights scores 0.78 - is Tuvalu. |
| Quote: |
country with a wretched record of human rights abuse could score a maximum total of 190. Saddam Hussein's Iraq proves the winner of the unmodified list - which measures human rights abuses outside of their economic context - with an unadjusted score of 155.
International sanctions and the legacy of Saddam's two wars against Iraq and the United Nations over Kuwait, which have crippled Iraq, give it a low rating on the UN's human development index. Iraq's new-found impoverishment catapults it down the list, leaving Algeria in poll position. |
http://www.algeria-watch.de/mrv/mrvrap/observe4.htm
the biggest thugs in the world are against the US. (wonder why that is ?)If they are defeated human rights will get better.
The US has got all the right enemies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| You're a supporter of human rights, or do you feel this is something that is conditional & can justifiably be compromised? |
He has said many times that torture is fine with him. He is wierd, and he has never been a positive image for the country he claims to support.
The world is a better place because the UN exists. Prove that wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Go worry that the US is too powerful.
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=29718&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90
BOBSTER SAID:
| Quote: |
| What I have said about international law in the past - as you well know - is that the insurgents probably do not care very much about it, and that if I were in their place I would not care either. Whether they believe Allah will take them to paradise or not, people who are fighting for their homes and their families against a foreign invading army do not CARE about international law, GB - they care about getting the job done |
..
BOBSTER SAID
| Quote: |
| Gonna gently suggest that you do not know what you would do in the event that massively armed invading armies marched down the street of the town or city where you resided as a boy. Would you compromise and collaborate with the invaders or do something else? I have no idea what you would do, and so I will make no judgments, but I have a feeling that if you were to do anything less than complete opposition then you just might regret it at some point in your life. |
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:29 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, I think the US has lost a considerable amount of power and influence since the arrival of the current administration.
And I don't believe I am alone in thinking this.
And no, it doesn't make me happy to say this.
The threat of punishment is more powerful than actual use of force.
(any classroom teacher worth his/her salt can tell you this)
What Bush has done has effectively shown the US military as bumbling
and misguided. How does this make the US .... stronger? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Give suggestions what the US ought to have done instead? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Start by reading this book. I haven't read it yet either, but I believe the answers are there. (at least some of them)
http://www.buzzflash.com/premiums/05/10/pre05137.html
Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of the Intelligence Conspiracy to Undermine the UN and Overthrow Saddam Hussein
by Scott Ritter
Let's just lay it on the line. When it came to WMDs and Iraq, Scott Ritter was right and the Busheviks were wrong. But they knew that, and he knew that. Too bad the American people didn't believe Ritter, because tens of thousands of Iraqis and Americans wouldn't be wounded and dead now.
As with anyone who violates the Bushevik code of Omerta, Ritter was targeted by Rove and his squad of enforcers. They attempted to discredit Ritter up, back and over.
Unlike members of the Bush administration, Ritter actually had military experience and a history of inspecting for WMDs in Iraq. He was one of the senior UN weapons inspectors in the '90s, was a Marine, and an adviser to General Schwarzkopf in the first Gulf War. Hey, those are some credentials compared to Vietnam evader Bush and 5-time draft deferred Dick Cheney, not to mention draft dodger Karl Rove.
But the more knowledgeable you personally are about something the Bush Administration is creating lies about, the greater the need for Karl Rove to discredit you.
In this book, "Iraq Confidential," it's payback time.
In his Foreword to Ritter's book, Seymour Hersh writes, "Denials will come when this book is published, but I can vouch for Scott's amazing recall and his extensive knowledge of the Iraqi disarmament game. That Scott continues to do what he does says something about his determination, his self-confidence, and his Americanism. He is still gung ho about his country, as a good Marine should be, and he believes that it can be -- must be -- changed for the better. All I can add is hurry up, Scott -- at the time of writing, George Bush has more than thirteen hundred days left in office, and that is a long, long time." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The WMDs weren't the main reason for the war.
Anway if US troops weren't in Saddam's face Saddam would kick out the inspectors re-arm and mass kill the Kurds, probably threaten Kuwait too.
| Quote: |
The slaughter of innocents is the worst cost of containment, but it is not the only cost of containment.
Containment allows Saddam Hussein to control the political climate of the Middle East. If it serves his interest to provoke a crisis, he can shoot at U.S. planes. He can mobilize his troops near Kuwait. He can support terrorists and destabilize his neighbors. The United States must respond to these provocations.
Worse, containment forces the United States to keep large conventional forces in Saudi Arabia and the rest of the region. That costs much more than money.
The existence of al Qaeda, and the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, are part of the price the United States has paid to contain Saddam Hussein.
The link is clear and direct. Since 1991 the United States has had forces in Saudi Arabia. Those forces are there for one purpose only: to defend the kingdom (and its neighbors) from Iraqi attack. If Saddam Hussein had either fallen from power in 1991 or fulfilled the terms of his cease-fire agreement and disarmed, U.S. forces would have left Saudi Arabia.
But Iraqi defiance forced the United States to stay, and one consequence was dire and direct. Osama bin Laden founded al Qaeda because U.S. forces stayed in Saudi Arabia.
This is the link between Saddam Hussein's defiance of international law and the events of Sept. 11; it is clear and compelling. No Iraqi violations, no Sept. 11.
So that is our cost.
And what have we bought?
We've bought the right of a dictator to suppress his own people, disturb the peace of the region and make the world darker and more dangerous for the American people.
We've bought the continuing presence of U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia, causing a profound religious offense to a billion Muslims around the world, and accelerating the alarming drift of Saudi religious and political leaders toward ever more extreme forms of anti-Americanism.
What we can't buy is protection from Hussein's development of weapons of mass destruction. Too many companies and too many states will sell him anything he wants, and Russia and France will continue to sabotage any inspections and sanctions regime.
Morally, politically, financially, containing Iraq is one of the costliest failures in the history of American foreign policy. Containment can be tweaked -- made a little less murderous, a little less dangerous, a little less futile -- but the basic equations don't change. Containing Hussein delivers civilians into the hands of a murderous psychopath, destabilizes the whole Middle East and foments anti-American terror -- with no end in sight.
This is disaster, not policy.
It is time for a change. |
You might want to look at this book
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0385512457/002-2274056-7748012
http://voxbaby.blogspot.com/2004/11/americas-secret-war.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I worry that George Bush is too powerful. A lot of people worry about that. Considering the damage he has done to America, this is a rational thing to have anxiety about.
You're posting dead links again, Joo ... wierd.
You are wierd because you seem to think that every thread that has something that
is really about The Bobster. Why do you bother? When you go posting links to thinkgs that don't exist, I can't imagine how you think you are accomplishing anything else dismantling any shred of credibility you might have.
The world is a better place becuase the UN exists. Prove that wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't write them. U did.
Anyway your credibilty was shot when it was shown that you bribe posters.
| Quote: |
| worry that George Bush is too powerful. A lot of people worry about that. Considering the damage he has done to America, this is a rational thing to have anxiety about |
Bush wasn't in that conversation. You were/ are worried that the US is too powerful and that any strategic gain that the US makes in the mideast is all ill gotten gain that must be returned.
You condemn the US for its actions (which are to force them to give up their war) but you refuse to condemn the insurgents.
But we know the answer to this one . It seems according the Bobster that the US has no right to force mideast regimes to stop teaching hate , funding Al Qaida , inciting violence and planning terror. Well Sorry Bob.
And of course it seems that Bob is worried that the US might get the power to do so. Well sorry Bob |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Why do you post dead links, Joo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I didn't write 'em |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
|
| 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
