Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Like this is going to fix anything
Reaver4k
Trainee in training
in Zocalo v2.0
[url]http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/35364.htm[/url]
[quote]November 29, 2004 -- WASHINGTON — Congress is likely to move to reduce U.S. funding of the United Nations if leaders at Turtle Bay don't come clean and institute major reforms in the wake of the Iraq oil-for-food scandal, The Post has learned.
Recent interviews with Congress members and staff investigators revealed growing shock and outrage at the scope of history's biggest financial scandal, in which Saddam Hussein is alleged to have ripped off $21.3 billion from a humanitarian program intended to provide food and medicine to the Iraqi people.
The officials said there is increasing sentiment to take drastic action, including cutting U.S funding if the United Nations doesn't make radical changes in its secretive policies and questionable management procedures.
The $1.12 billion annual U.S. contribution to the United Nations represents 22 percent of the world body's budget.
"This is life-and-death stuff. To see U.N. officials involved in a program that was used to pay off families of Palestinian suicide bombers, to discover that money from this program is now being used to fund the people killing our troops in Iraq is very troubling," Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) told The Post. "I definitely feel that people are fed up." Flake has sponsored legislation that would reduce U.S. funding to the United Nations by 10 percent, and claims the bill already has 75 co-sponsors. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate.
So far, the chairmen of the congressional committees investigating the oil-for-food scandal have not endorsed the measure. They say they are waiting to see the results of the U.N.-appointed investigation headed by former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker.
But one congressional investigator said that a move to reduce or cut off U.S. funding could quickly gain momentum — and the Bush administration would be unwilling or unable to stop it — if culpable U.N. officials aren't prosecuted or fired and major reforms are not enacted.
"What we really want to see is greater transparency in U.N. programs. That's the big issue here," the investigator said.
"These oil-for-food deals were negotiated in secret. If it was known that Saddam Hussein was given sole authority to pick and chose companies he would do business with . . . [and] that he was giving oil vouchers to U.N. officials and to Russian and French politicians to buy votes on the Security Council, there would have been a move to stop it." [/quote]
Yes I know the UN needs alot of reform and Teeth to take action..... But I know its a impossiblity.. Becuase America, China, Russia and France wont let it happen.
Edit: The US will whine and bitch all they want about how the UN is ineffective, Yet at the same time wont do anything to give them the power to do anything. Whould you want to give a someone power, when your a superpower, I think not. That mean you would not be able to do what you want and when you want. If the US does not like the UN, they can always just pull out.
[quote]November 29, 2004 -- WASHINGTON — Congress is likely to move to reduce U.S. funding of the United Nations if leaders at Turtle Bay don't come clean and institute major reforms in the wake of the Iraq oil-for-food scandal, The Post has learned.
Recent interviews with Congress members and staff investigators revealed growing shock and outrage at the scope of history's biggest financial scandal, in which Saddam Hussein is alleged to have ripped off $21.3 billion from a humanitarian program intended to provide food and medicine to the Iraqi people.
The officials said there is increasing sentiment to take drastic action, including cutting U.S funding if the United Nations doesn't make radical changes in its secretive policies and questionable management procedures.
The $1.12 billion annual U.S. contribution to the United Nations represents 22 percent of the world body's budget.
"This is life-and-death stuff. To see U.N. officials involved in a program that was used to pay off families of Palestinian suicide bombers, to discover that money from this program is now being used to fund the people killing our troops in Iraq is very troubling," Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) told The Post. "I definitely feel that people are fed up." Flake has sponsored legislation that would reduce U.S. funding to the United Nations by 10 percent, and claims the bill already has 75 co-sponsors. A companion bill has been introduced in the Senate.
So far, the chairmen of the congressional committees investigating the oil-for-food scandal have not endorsed the measure. They say they are waiting to see the results of the U.N.-appointed investigation headed by former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker.
But one congressional investigator said that a move to reduce or cut off U.S. funding could quickly gain momentum — and the Bush administration would be unwilling or unable to stop it — if culpable U.N. officials aren't prosecuted or fired and major reforms are not enacted.
"What we really want to see is greater transparency in U.N. programs. That's the big issue here," the investigator said.
"These oil-for-food deals were negotiated in secret. If it was known that Saddam Hussein was given sole authority to pick and chose companies he would do business with . . . [and] that he was giving oil vouchers to U.N. officials and to Russian and French politicians to buy votes on the Security Council, there would have been a move to stop it." [/quote]
Yes I know the UN needs alot of reform and Teeth to take action..... But I know its a impossiblity.. Becuase America, China, Russia and France wont let it happen.
Edit: The US will whine and bitch all they want about how the UN is ineffective, Yet at the same time wont do anything to give them the power to do anything. Whould you want to give a someone power, when your a superpower, I think not. That mean you would not be able to do what you want and when you want. If the US does not like the UN, they can always just pull out.
Comments
[B]Ya know what I think thats exactly what they're trying to do, pull out. They are putting a buffer between the international community & America its turning into US vs THEM. Im right your, wrong. Bush is playing god & that scares the shit outta me. [/B][/QUOTE]
Would'nt that distant the USA from its allies even more. It mite unify the world in some way.
I know that some Americans(The ones in the red States) Dont want america in the UN, and they should just pull out.
Edit: This and the US Threating to shoot down the UE, Russia and Chinas Joint GPS system, if it where Use buy an "Enemy". the us would shoot down the system.... Its getting scary.. and I have a bad feeling about this.
First of all, why is the U.S. footing 22% of the UN's budget? According to the [URL=http://www.un.org/Overview/growth.htm]U.N.[/URL] there are 191 countries (as of 2002) that belong to it. It sure doesn't sound like the other 190 countries are contributing the same percentage as we are (in terms of their yearly budget).
Second, the officials and representatives who took part in this scandal should be brought to justice. Just because they belong to the U.N. doesn't give them any special power. This situation sounds almost like the Enron fallout from a few years ago. 21 billion dollars is a LOT of money to have been wasted.
Third, why must anything that has to do with the United States be associated in a bad way with President Bush? You do realize that there have been rumors for almost a decade (including during the Clinton Administration) that the money was not being spent on humanitarian aid? It's not President Bush's fault that this happened.
I'm really sick and tired of seeing people associate anything bad about America with President Bush. Give it up everyone, he's not the Anti-Christ some people make him out to be. He did not personally cause all the problems America has. Review the last ten years. Most of the problems we had then are still around now. So, you don't like him, fine. You had your chance to properly voice your opinion at the polls (US citizens). There's no reason to be a sore loser if your candidate didn't win. There is always the next election.
If you REALLY feel America is going the wrong way, then go outside and do something about it. Go work for a candidate (from any office) that you like and help him/her get elected. Go help raise money for a foundation or charity. There are many things you can do than just sit around and talk about it.
[B]"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." - President John F. Kennedy[/B]
[SIZE=1](Yes, I'm aware he's not the first to say this, but he was the most famous person to say it.)[/SIZE]
[B]You had your chance to properly voice your opinion at the polls.[/B][/QUOTE]
No I didn't! :D
Unless you have lived in the United States for an extended period of time, you have no way of knowing what our nation is like. Sure, you catch glimpses of it on the evening news in your respective country, but you need to LIVE here to fully grasp everything.
It's the same way if Biggles were to complain about the elections in New Zealand. Sure, I could make comments on it, but they wouldn't be really justified as I've never experienced New Zealand or their customs in any way.
[B]Simmonds, you do not live or work in the United States. You are a Canadian citizen. The election in the United States is for US CITIZENS only. [/B][/QUOTE]
How stupid do you take me for??
Dont the Dessions the US makes effects the whole world.
[B]How stupid do you take me for??
[/B][/QUOTE]
You really want me to answer that?
Seriously, you tell me. Your comments in this thread and others do not seem to be very intelligent and pretty much everyone here will agree with that.
If you don't want to come across like that, then try to put more thought into your messages. One of your biggest flaws is spelling. At least spellcheck your messages so you don't come across as an uneducated child. :D
If you really want to be taken seriously, then you need to do a few things.
1. Check for grammar and spelling mistakes.
2. Check all facts before hitting the "submit button".
3. Do not make unfounded accusations.
Try taking a class or two in debate. It will do wonders.
[B]How stupid do you take me for?? [/B][/QUOTE]
You need to stop tempting me with that question all the time... :p
:D ;)
Hey Simmonds - since when did Congress ever actually send the UN any money? We are the most negligent country in the world as far as supporting the UN...yet we created it.
[B]How stupid do you take me for?? [/B][/QUOTE]
Wow...best statement from you I ever heard! Completely and utterly stupid!
Damn he walked into that!
:D
[B]I voted, does that give me a right to bitch? [/B][/QUOTE]
Yeah - you can complain :)
However whinning isn't the same...and non-voters aren't the same. If you didn't vote and were a US citizen, you (a) should be ashamed and (b) are unable to complain. Simmonds however isn't even a US Citizen. Sure he can complain...but he can't dictate. The only thing worse then our own idiots and asses in office is other countries trying to make us change our mind. While I 100% do not support the reelection of Bush, I also feel that other countries bitching did not help us get rid of him. In fact, to some in the US, it had exactly the opposite effect.
[B]You really want me to answer that?
Seriously, you tell me. Your comments in this thread and others do not seem to be very intelligent and pretty much everyone here will agree with that.
If you don't want to come across like that, then try to put more thought into your messages. One of your biggest flaws is spelling. At least spellcheck your messages so you don't come across as an uneducated child. :D
If you really want to be taken seriously, then you need to do a few things.
1. Check for grammar and spelling mistakes.
2. Check all facts before hitting the "submit button".
3. Do not make unfounded accusations.
Try taking a class or two in debate. It will do wonders. [/B][/QUOTE]
Nice statement :)
[B]Simmonds however isn't even a US Citizen.[/B][/QUOTE]Actually, a good argument can be made for his "unofficial" US citizenship. Heck, if we'd just annexed Canada we wouldn't have this Bush problem.
I Just had to post this!
Since its birth, the United Nations has sanctioned two full-scale wars as well as dozens of peacekeeping and monitoring operations.
Waging war
1950: After North Korean launched an attack across the de facto border at the 38th parallel, the Security Council passed a resolution calling on all members to assist in halting the strike. The motion gave the United States the authority to help South Korea wage war against the North, which was supported by China.
1991: The United States led a coalition of nations to dislodge Iraq from Kuwait after President Saddam Hussein ignored a U.N. threat of force if he didn’t withdraw from the tiny gulf nation, which he invaded the previous summer.
Making peace
(current operations with start date)
Europe: Bosnia-Herzegovina, 1995; Kosovo, 1999
The Mideast: Cyprus, 1964; Lebanon, 1988; Iraq-Kuwait border, 1991
Africa: Western Sahara, 1991; Congo, 1999; Sierra Leone 1999
Notable failures
Somalia: The U.S. dispatched 28,000 troops to support U.N. humanitarian efforts in the war-torn nation in 1992. But shortly after the disastrous “Blackhawk Down” episode in the capital, Mogadishu, in October 1993, in which 18 American troops were killed, the American force was withdrawn.
Rwanda: The United Nations accepted responsibility for failing to stop the 1994 massacre of 500,000, mostly minority Tutsis. The United Nations had 2,500 troops in the country, but governments pulled out most of the soldiers after the 10 Belgian peacekeepers were killed and despite warnings of a likely genocide.
The Balkans: A U.N. “safe haven” in Srebrenica was overrun in 1995 by Serb forces, who massacred an estimated 7,000 Bosnian Muslims. A lightly armed U.N. force from the Netherlands failed to stop the killing.
SOURCE : MSNBC RESEARCH
[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6631989/[/url]
GREAT INTERACTIVE ON THE PAGE 3/4 WAY DOWN!!!!
Edit: Canada sat on its ass, even though it was one of out generals who has in command of the thing.
[B]How stupid do you take me for??[/B][/QUOTE]
That is SO getting sigged. :D (And Biggles, before you say anything, this is all in good fun.)
Why are you complaining over the United States demanding UN reform to make it less corrupt, or at least more transparent?
Is it because it's the United States that's complaining? Or is it because you think the United States shouldn't cut back funding because of "secretive policies and questionable management procedures."