what's wrong with allowing the UN to get us out of this mess? dubya is getting support from NATO, but it was made clear yesterday that this "support" would not be additional troops. obviously, the world doesn't want to help dubya and it will be necessary for kerry to win before we get that kind of support. that should be enough reason to vote kerry for many people who are tired of seeing our soldiers dying daily.<br><br>----<br>"even if we get bin Laden or Zawahiri now, it is 2 years 2 late. Al Qaeda is a very different org now. It has had time to adapt. The administration should have finished this job." Leverett, former Bush Natíl Security Cncl staff specialist.
I definitely think it's worth a shot, but I want him to have a back up plan if the UN reverts to its passive, squabbling ways...<br><br>It's bad enough trying to get things done when an organization is made up of all of ONE country's representatives- now imagine ALL the different cultures, and differing ideologies WITHIN those cultures- it's a wonder they all agree on what time to eat lunch every day...<br><br><br>[color:red]You slap my back, I'll slap yours!</font color=red>
I'll admit I'm seriously under-informed about the some of the questions I'm going to ask in regards to the UN. So, since you seem to be more informed Sean and you can probably save me some Google time I'll ask you (or anyone else who'd like to chime in...<br><br> 1) What past mess has the UN gotten anyone out of?<br><br>2) If Iraqis respected the UN why did they blow up their building and people and drive them out of the country?<br><br>3) Are you saying the world hates Bush so much they are willing to let the new democracy in Iraq fail? In other words, "the world" is only going to help Iraq depending on who is running America? So, the world doesn't give a rats-a$$ about Iraq and its people because if they did shouldn't they be helping no matter that their personel differences are with Bush, don't you think?<br><br>4) You think we should pick the president based on who we think the world wants to be president? Shouldn't we be picking who will be looking out for the best interest of America?<br><br>Dean Davis
Well, these are serious questions I have. Not "smart-ass" I already think I know the answer" type questions.<br><br>I really (out of ignorance) don't know any UN sucess stories. I just have never heard a news story start out "Today, the UN was instrumental in bringing peace and prosperity to nation X". There might be 100's such stories, I just don't know any.<br><br>I was and still am confused behind the reasons why anyone in Iraq would blow up the UN building and kill UN workers.<br><br>My third question is a source of confusion. I understand the reasons why countries like France and Germany won't send troops but what else do we expect to get out of them if Kerry is president that we wouldn't if Bush goes to a second term?<br><br>My fourth questions is of a general personal opinion nature.<br><br><br><br>Dean Davis
please note, i am only speaking for myself.<br><br>the iraqis and the middle east respect a UN presence, which is why the insurgents made sure to scare the UN off leaving the US as the big evil. a UN presence will remove the appearance that the US is involved solely for our own financial windfall. the UN is seen as being even-handed -- at least much, much, much more so than the US.<br><br>the world is willing to let the US struggle alone because they hate the US so much. the US created the mess in Iraq and they are allowing us to fix it. if we required the world to help us solve the mess then we wouldn't have been so quick to turn our noses to them. obviously, we have things under control or we wouldn't have gone it alone. you can say that iraq is failing, but those are your words; not the rest of the world's. now, i haven't heard dubya publicly ask countries like france and germany for support on the ground, so i am not sure why they are considered to be letting iraq suffer. kerry has stated that he will ask and get their support. that's a big step.<br><br>and, i think our image in the world is very, very important. i don't think we should allow the world to choose our president, but i also think dubya is more hated than any president in my lifetime. i think dubya is doing more damage than good for our image in the world. i think kerry will not only look out for our interests, but that he will also be able to protect our interests and do so within the world community and as a participant in the world community...and, most importantly, with support from the world community. the bottom line is that fewer americans will be risking their lives each day and fewer will be dying.<br><br>regarding your first question...i should have stated that kerry will get NATO involved. the same NATO that was successful in bosnia under the direction of general wesley clark. NATO is a global security organization that can create a stable and secure environment in iraq. <br><br>cheers!<br><br>----<br>"even if we get bin Laden or Zawahiri now, it is 2 years 2 late. Al Qaeda is a very different org now. It has had time to adapt. The administration should have finished this job." Leverett, former Bush Natíl Security Cncl staff specialist.
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.