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.

 

UN Peacekeepers Raping Children - Again

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Justify it? No , is it part of the problem? Yes, identifying the cause is diffrent from excusing them.

But the cause of rape is very different from man to man. Why paedophilia? Why is it more prevelant in the military? We aren't talking a quick drunken screw here!

....Like I said if you hadnt gone off on the high horse, I do not condone nor does anything excuse rape. Rape is wrong no matter what reason and no matter what the situation, anything that hurts a women or even a child for that matter is WRONG.

I'm just trying to point out that the troopers involved should be punished not the UN , the UN has had its image tarnished AGAIN so it must live with the black spot so that should be fitting enough.

My high horse is actually a thoroughbred..Irish Draught, chocolate brown!
It has also been discussed as to why the UN should not be held accountable..Infact I reiterated it, in a post above..You can't shoot the messanger..
And why!!
Britain and the US(others too but the majority of members belong to one of other) have tarnished themselves repeatedly..Should Bush and the Queen hang because of the conduct of their military and their Governments devolved??
Answer that one because the situation is no different.




posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murphs
But the cause of rape is very different from man to man. Why paedophilia? Why is it more prevelant in the military? We aren't talking a quick drunken screw here!

Ofcourse it does, but if thers a common thread between them all it would be an idea to find out whats causing it yes no?



My high horse is actually a thoroughbred..Irish Draught, chocolate brown!
It has also been discussed as to why the UN should not be held accountable..Infact I reiterated it, in a post above..You can't shoot the messanger..
And why!!

Then why are you thinking that I am excusing these people and trying to blame it on the UN?


Britain and the US(others too but the majority of members belong to one of other) have tarnished themselves repeatedly..Should Bush and the Queen hang because of the conduct of their military and their Governments devolved??
Answer that one because the situation is no different.

......Go back and read my post then ask me again, if you actually read it then I suggest you REREAD my posts and if its still not clear enough for you then ask me again.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
Typical FlyersFan "Anti-UN" tripe.


Rape isn't tripe.


What FF seems to ignore, when convenient, is that UN forces are made up, primarily, of developing countries forces.


So what? The UN is in charge of putting these people there and if the people are mass rapists, then they certainly aren't doing their job .. and the UN isn't doing it's job of protecting the people in that country.


Originally posted by stumason
Indeed. Which is what irks me about FF position here. The UN is evil, she screams, they rape children!! But the US is innocent at Abhu Graib, that was the soldiers fault..... Hypocrasy spewing forth.


You are a hoot! What irks you about my position is that your precious UN (Useless Nations) got caught with it's pants down .. literally .. AGAIN.


And actually, I didn't scream 'the UN is evil' .. My personal comment was a LAUGH at Koffi Annan for wanting a million dollar bonus for allegedly doing his job. (which obviously he hasn't been)

Abu Garib is totally different. A half dozen National Guardsmen made dogs bark at naked men. While it is not proper behavior it is no way MASS RAPE like the people from the UN are engaging in. AND the US brought those people to justice. The UN isn't.


Originally posted by stumason
Funny how some US posters now hate the UN because they haven't been getting their own way. Like spoilt kids sometimes...


Funny how you keep slamming US posters who hate the UN while refusing to see why we hate it. Just like a spoilt kid - back atchya.

'just because we aren't getting our own way'???
Yeah, riiiiiiiight. How about we hate it because it's USELESS. Because it sucks money and then turns around and bites us. Because the Security Council take billions in bribes. Because it's corrupt.

You're down to see-through personal attacks and poor deflection techniques stumason


[edit on 1/5/2007 by FlyersFan]



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by stumason
Typical FlyersFan "Anti-UN" tripe.


Rape isn't tripe.


What FF seems to ignore, when convenient, is that UN forces are made up, primarily, of developing countries forces.


So what? The UN is in charge of putting these people there and if the people are mass rapists, then they certainly aren't doing their job .. and the UN isn't doing it's job of protecting the people in that country.




What action do you propose?

What can the UN do, to do a better job of protecting its 'charges'?




posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
What can the UN do, to do a better job of protecting its 'charges'?


VERY good question!
My answer at the moment is - I have no idea but I know that what they are doing now isn't working and sometimes doing nothing is better than doing something that makes things worse.

I have no idea what kind of screening they do. I have no idea what kind of oversight they do. I have no idea what kind of education they give these people before they ship them out. I have no idea how well they prepare these people for the cultures they will be working in.

Whatever they are doing .. it is not working .. and sometimes doing nothing is better.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by stumason
Indeed. Which is what irks me about FF position here. The UN is evil, she screams, they rape children!! But the US is innocent at Abhu Graib, that was the soldiers fault..... Hypocrasy spewing forth.


You are a hoot! What irks you about my position is that your precious UN (Useless Nations) got caught with it's pants down .. literally .. AGAIN.


As did the US in many similar occasions. THe US rapes too.


And actually, I didn't scream 'the UN is evil' .. My personal comment was a LAUGH at Koffi Annan for wanting a million dollar bonus for allegedly doing his job. (which obviously he hasn't been)


The same can be said of GWB, BTW.


Abu Garib is totally different. A half dozen National Guardsmen made dogs bark at naked men. While it is not proper behavior it is no way MASS RAPE like the people from the UN are engaging in. AND the US brought those people to justice. The UN isn't.


What about the soldiers who raped the female prisoners in Abu Ghraib? Many many reports, nothing was done to them.


'just because we aren't getting our own way'???
Yeah, riiiiiiiight. How about we hate it because it's USELESS. Because it sucks money and then turns around and bites us. Because the Security Council take billions in bribes. Because it's corrupt.


Remeber, we're part of the security council. Not only that, but can you show me where the UN is useless? Apart from simply disagreeing with the US that is.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by stumason
Indeed. Which is what irks me about FF position here. The UN is evil, she screams, they rape children!! But the US is innocent at Abhu Graib, that was the soldiers fault..... Hypocrasy spewing forth.


You are a hoot! What irks you about my position is that your precious UN (Useless Nations) got caught with it's pants down .. literally .. AGAIN.


As did the US in many similar occasions. THe US rapes too.


And actually, I didn't scream 'the UN is evil' .. My personal comment was a LAUGH at Koffi Annan for wanting a million dollar bonus for allegedly doing his job. (which obviously he hasn't been)


The same can be said of GWB, BTW.



*snip*

Which would be OK if this was the topic, it isn't. This is about the UN.

Let's discuss the topic folks.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by stumason
Typical FlyersFan "Anti-UN" tripe.


Rape isn't tripe.


What FF seems to ignore, when convenient, is that UN forces are made up, primarily, of developing countries forces.


So what? The UN is in charge of putting these people there and if the people are mass rapists, then they certainly aren't doing their job .. and the UN isn't doing it's job of protecting the people in that country.




What action do you propose?

What can the UN do, to do a better job of protecting its 'charges'?




I don't think the UN can do anything except have an anonymous facility for the reporting of such attacks..
Then it is up to the individual regiments or countries to deal with the perpretrators.
If the UN took this upon itself can you imagine the amount of money involved in prosecuting an individual by time you went through every regiment/squadron, major, corporal, general, right up to Government level of 70 countries..

It needs to be reported and then dealt with.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

*snip*

Which would be OK if this was the topic, it isn't. This is about the UN.

Let's discuss the topic folks.


Fair enough, but I do think the Abu Ghraib issue is on topic. Since the OP stated that the events surrounding the prison are different, I thought bringing up the similarities were necessary.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Murphs
OK..I'll take your stand..Should the messenger be shot?? In this case Kofi Annan! If it was British troops, TB(No actually it might be the Queen)..If it was the Irish..Bertie Ahern, No actually Mary McAleese.??
Should these successful Governments be pulled down and devolved or should the a facility be available for anonymous reporting of such events as rape and paedophilia..That is what the UN ineffectually is an international governing

Kofi Annan has not taken enough responsibility to stop this. I'm glad he is gone.

As I stated before, it is how justice is meted out that determines the effectivemess of a command structure.


..I don't know if you have experience but if you do you know how touts are treated in the military...

What are touts?



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
well, the military mindset does leave a soldier a bit more open to the possibility of becoming a rapist

there is a hyper-masculinity element that's the typical cause of rape by the military

Bull crap.

And the same "hyper-masculinity" makes for effective soldiers.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by Murphs
OK..I'll take your stand..Should the messenger be shot?? In this case Kofi Annan! If it was British troops, TB(No actually it might be the Queen)..If it was the Irish..Bertie Ahern, No actually Mary McAleese.??
Should these successful Governments be pulled down and devolved or should the a facility be available for anonymous reporting of such events as rape and paedophilia..That is what the UN ineffectually is an international governing

Kofi Annan has not taken enough responsibility to stop this. I'm glad he is gone.

As I stated before, it is how justice is meted out that determines the effectivemess of a command structure.

I am not replying in detail because I am having a sense of De je Vu


..I don't know if you have experience but if you do you know how touts are treated in the military...

What are touts?
Informers..Witnesses..



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
well, the military mindset does leave a soldier a bit more open to the possibility of becoming a rapist

there is a hyper-masculinity element that's the typical cause of rape by the military

Bull crap.

And the same "hyper-masculinity" makes for effective soldiers.

Having their testicles removed makes bulls more aggressive *hyper masculine* if you like..
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Since the OP stated that the events surrounding the prison are different, I thought bringing up the similarities were necessary.


Actually, the prison was brought up first, and THEN I said that the events were different . But whatever .... back to the UN and the rape problem.


Originally posted by jsobecky
Kofi Annan has not taken enough responsibility to stop this. I'm glad he is gone.


Not only did he not take responsibility, but he demanded a million dollar bonus for when he retired.
Anyways .. there is a new fella running things. Perhaps this new person will stop the nepatism, corruption, rapes, and bribes that are going on/have happened in the UN, and it can finally be worth something positive in the future.

The UN is aware of these rapes and has been aware that these things have been happening. Does anyone know, FOR SURE, what they do when these things happen? What they have as training for people before they go to these countries? What they have for screening of people?



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   


The hypocricy is madenning FF, and jso. You have die hard support for the US when American soldiers do the same exact thing. These exact same questions could be asked of our administration, but you simply ignore it when it does. How this is off topic is beyond me.

Anyway. Yes, this should be researched, and those directly responsible, all te way up te line, should be punished. However, I doubt that Kofi had direct kowledge of these events, and his request for any money is unrelated to these events.



posted on Jan, 5 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   


The UN is aware of these rapes and has been aware that these things have been happening. Does anyone know, FOR SURE, what they do when these things happen? What they have as training for people before they go to these countries? What they have for screening of people?


Thing is FF, the UN has already punished anyone under it's control and passed any evidence against the troops themselves to the countries of origin. They don't have direct jurisdiction over the soldiers, that falls to the country itself. What more can be done?

As for your "screening" question. I assume you mean the UN staff as opposed to the soldiers?



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420


The hypocricy is madenning FF, and jso. You have die hard support for the US when American soldiers do the same exact thing. These exact same questions could be asked of our administration, but you simply ignore it when it does. How this is off topic is beyond me.

How is it off-topic? Because it is nothing more than an attempt at deflection. Because this thread is about the UN peacekeepers, not American troops.

If you want to discuss your accusations against American troops, start another thread.


However, I doubt that Kofi had direct kowledge of these events, and his request for any money is unrelated to these events.

Oh please. Of course he had knowledge.


LAST MONTH A CLASSIFIED UNITED Nations report prompted Secretary General Kofi Annan to admit that U.N. peacekeepers and staff have sexually abused or exploited war refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The worst of the 150 or so allegations of misconduct--some of them captured on videotape--include pedophilia, rape, and prostitution. While a U.N. investigation into the scandal continues, the organization has just suspended two more peacekeepers in neighboring Burundi over similar charges. The revelations come three years after another U.N. report found "widespread" evidence of sexual abuse of West African refugees.

www.weeklystandard.com...


If he didn't have knowledge, then he failed at his duties.



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
How is it off-topic? Because it is nothing more than an attempt at deflection. Because this thread is about the UN peacekeepers, not American troops.

This is about UN troops and the actions done by a select few of them , we've stated before how US and UK troops have done the same things if you want to call this off topic then fine do so but it doesnt change the fact it happens and there is a link between the two. So DO NOT try and make UN troops out to be any diffrent from US troops with regard to calibre or training because I wont have a mate of mine in the UK army who is wearing a blue lid be insulted like that.



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
This is about UN troops and the actions done by a select few of them , we've stated before how US and UK troops have done the same things if you want to call this off topic then fine do so but it doesnt change the fact it happens and there is a link between the two. So DO NOT try and make UN troops out to be any diffrent from US troops with regard to calibre or training because I wont have a mate of mine in the UK army who is wearing a blue lid be insulted like that.


Actually it was me that pointed out that this is off topic. The discussion is about the UN. Deflection of this by pointing out something else IS off topic. It's done far too often around here and adds nothing to the topic.



posted on Jan, 6 2007 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
As for your "screening" question. I assume you mean the UN staff as opposed to the soldiers?


Good queston!


I'd like to know what screening the staff goes through AND I'd like to know if the UN has any screening requirements of the 'peacekeepers' that wear the blue helmet.

For example - Would the UN say to the USA ... we need 2,000 troops from your country to go to ____ (fill in). We expect them to meet such and such standards and that you have screened them for _____ (fill in the blank) psychology problems.

The US Army does screening of applicants. It doesn't catch all problems, but it does help weed out many. Does anyone know .. I can't find the answer .. if the UN has certain requirements of the countries sending peacekeepers??




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join