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 WestPoint23
Yes DW, you can shake your head, but its me that has to shake the wallet for men that do nothing but bend over backwards to oppose my country.
I cant seem to find any law that says one member due to its status has to pay more than the rest.
Originally posted by Nathabeanz
Chavez has been challenging the U.S. in several different areas and it seems he's trying to use the U.N. for leverage. These things are never good situations, economically or politicaly
Originally posted by devilwasp
the UN anti mine campign or mabye the UN aid programes but hey those mistakes made by individuals seem able to wreck an orginisation, does that mean we shouldnt trust the UK or US military since both have had men and women commit acts of terror?
Originally posted by masqua
**IMHO**
That's just the problem, then, isn't it, devilwasp? The organization is ineffectual because it cannot do what it needs to, due to footdragging by the very ones to profit from the misery. Individuals and/or countries of means and power influence what goes on to the detriment of those with less or no influence at all.
Personally, it is still my opinion that Princess Diana was assasinated because of her involvement in the effort to reduce production of land mines. And yet, what do we read in ATS about who is going to make more land mines? You know and I know, because we both read the boards enough.
Don't get me wrong...I still believe in the faint hope that someday the world could be a better place, where I won't be cynical and see some sort ofinternational body (with teeth) govern the nations fairly. (read NWO)
But NYC ain't the spot for that...America, for the most part hates the U.N., so I say, move it. Maybe the change of air will do it some good.
Let Chavez have the dog and pony show.
Originally posted by devilwasp
Yeah and who would have sent it?
The Uk? we're overstretched?
The US? They're paying the bill why should they risk lives?
France? They're overstretched too.
tell me, WHO ? whoo???
Originally posted by masqua
Since we're talking about the UN, I would be considering asking China, Russia or Indonesia to send troops, for instance...scary, huh? But that's the problem...the UK nor the Us would contemplate asking 'the perceived enemy' for help. That's what makes the UN ineffectual...the fact that they can't get around politics.
interesting thread from bitraiser, btw...Paul Martin actually agrees with me!
abovetopsecret.com...
About Princess Diana...(and, as a Canadian, I'm allowed to speak), her father in law still agrees with my suspicions as well. The new statue in Harrods is quite beautiful, wouldn't you agree?
Originally posted by devilwasp
Eh?
You relise countries like russia and indonesia send more troops than both the US and the UK combined....right...