It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by UK Wizard
Originally posted by edsinger
No personally in my opinion it has not shown to be responsible enough. no one is perfect but the UN is to corrupt...
And the US is perfect is it
Originally posted by American Mad Man
No country is perfect. So lets not creat another potential multi billion dollar scandal with thousands of lives at stake.
should the un be militarized?
Originally posted by TrueLies
god could you imagine all the rape cases that would sprout up if that happened?
I think the UN just needs to burn away they are so corrupt..
Start a new world alliance where kofi annan and his cronies aren't allowed into the club.
Originally posted by devilwasp
Originally posted by American Mad Man
No country is perfect. So lets not creat another potential multi billion dollar scandal with thousands of lives at stake.
So you think the entire UN is currupt?
Originally posted by UK Wizard
This is a idea that came up in ATS chat from talk about the new EU battlegroups:
----------------
UN Battlegroups
Each country would have their own independent military.
But there would also be joint UN controlled forces.
eg UK/German battlegroup
eg New Zealand/UK battlegroup
This way where ever in the world an event happens there will be a UN battlegroup ready to respond to the event.
The forces could be labelled:
1st Global Battlegroup
2nd Global Battlegroup
3rd Global Battlegroup
etc
eg terrorist militia attack a city in Eastern Europe, the German/Norwegian battlegroup responds, supported by the UK/French Battlegroup
Originally posted by Wodan
what would the usage be?
if there were such forces, they would have still to wait till the United Nations decide if they either get used or not,
- if it gets done by the world security council, the others feel oppresed, and may think that their military gets used for other peoples interests.
And who dicides, which states are aggressors, which are they victims?
who decides, which non-state organisations are freedom fighters, and which are terrorists?
Originally posted by American Mad Man
And thats what I am saying. NO! I am sick of the US paying for everything. The US already pays for 35% of the entire UN. And now the US should pay another 30 billion dollars? No!
So now NATO takes on the responsability? Hmmm, sounds like more burden on the US, UK, Poland, etc. Why should WE take on all of this crap? NATO is fine as it is. If the UN needs help, just ask NATO instead of sucking up billions of extra dollars.
It won't work like that. If you want the UN to have their own military they need to stream line everything. 1 main rifle. 1 main pistol. 1 main fighter. 1 min bomber. 1 main tank. 1 main APC. 1 main transport. Etc Etc Etc.
Its not that easy. You need bases in the middle east. What country is going to allow an international military base in their country that will most likely consist of mainly christians? What about in sout America where the economic boom will be fought over? How do you award one country the base and not the other?
Exactly my point! There are already a million things that are screwed up! Why make another multi billion dollar one? The UN has PROVEN through SCANDAL and IRRESPONSABILITY to be unworthy of trust. Again, if they need a military force, call NATO - it's already there and won't cost any more money.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. If you are saying the US doesn't pay that much, I will have you know that we pay 30% of the TOTAL UN buget. Why in the flying # should we have to pay for 1/3 of an organization that lives to tell us how wrong we are? I would like the US to leae the UN all together. It would disolve in a week because no one else would put up the money.
Not really. The US produces the vast majority of the worlds best military gear. Our planes are clearly the best. Our MBT is the best. We will have the best rifle as soon as the XM-8 comes out. Best helo's. Best ships. Best subs. Best missles. Best bombs. Best artillery.
And since as you said "the rich countries should pay the most", should all of those US dollars then go to buy Rusian equipment? HELL NO! Every cent of our money should go towards buying US equipment, just like the Russians would want their money buying their stuff.
This is exactly how scandals happen. Who ever is in charge of deciding where the oney gets spent gets bribed.
In short, if the rest of the world wants to do it, go ahead. I don't want 1 cent of US tax payers money spent on this. We don't need an international military. If we have a problem, we can take care of it ourselves with our own military. It would cost less for us just to show up with our own military.
[edit on 13-2-2005 by American Mad Man]
Originally posted by American Mad Man
Hmmm, sounds like more burden on the US, UK, Poland, etc.