Good to be the King

[KipWellsFan]

YOU ARE RIGHT!  They are not SUPPOSED to like it, just deal with it.

 

The UNITED Nations

[YASNY]

The UNITED Nations

 

WE should just let them build that new UN building in Montreal or something. Get their asses out of NY.

[KipWellsFan]

WE should just let them build that new UN building in Montreal or something. Get their asses out of NY.

 

 

We'd be honored.

[YASNY]

 

We'd be honored.

 

That figures. :headshake

[southsider2k5]

The UNITED Nations

 

LMAO. We are talking about a group that is afraid of talking in too strong of a language against genocide in the Sudan today, I would hardly emphasize the "United" when it comes to actually fulfilling what their charter is supposed to be. The UN is a joke and needs to be torn down and started over.

[KipWellsFan]

That figures.  :headshake

 

I'm not sure where you are coming from here Yas. Are you just really against the current United Nations, or Kofi?

[YASNY]

I'm not sure where you are coming from here Yas.  Are you just really against the current United Nations, or Kofi?

 

The United Nations is a f***ing joke, and corrupt to the core. Your nation is welcome to the bastards as far as I am concerned. Just pay their bills that we do when you take them.

[KipWellsFan]

LMAO.  We are talking about a group that is afraid of talking in too strong of a language against genocide in the Sudan today, I would hardly emphasize the "United" when it comes to actually fulfilling what their charter is supposed to be.  The UN is a joke and needs to be torn down and started over.

 

Could be, but Bolton has said the United Nations could only be effective with American leadership and when it is in America's interest. The ideals behind the UNITED nations has great meaning to me and just because the United Nations has fallen on hard times doesn't make Bolton's appointment logical or deserved. Maybe the United States government considers the United Nations useless but other countries don't and this appointment is another step in turning world opinion against the United States.

 

Here's to Bolton having changed some of his opinions since that rant of his was recorded.

Edited August 2, 2005 by KipWellsFan

[YASNY]

Could be, but Bolton has said the United Nations could only be effective with American leadership and when it is in America's interest.  The ideals behind the UNITED nations has great meaning to me and just because the United Nations has fallen on hard times doesn't make Bolton's appointment logical or deserved.  Maybe the United States government considers the United Nations useless but other countries don't and this appointment is another step is turning world opinion against the United States.

 

Here's to Bolton having changed some of his opinions since that rant of his was recorded.

 

I hope Bolton goes in there and raises all kind of hell. The UN ain't worth the powder to blow it to hell. Somebody needs to slap that s*** out of those son of a b****es and get their damn attention.

Edited August 2, 2005 by YASNY

[juddling]

I have a serious question for those of you here that are speaking out AGAINST Bolton. What are you afraid he is going to do? Or not do? And please, don't spout off the party line, we have all heard that one before, just as we have all heard what he WILL do for us. Inquiring minds want to know!

[southsider2k5]

Could be, but Bolton has said the United Nations could only be effective with American leadership and when it is in America's interest.  The ideals behind the UNITED nations has great meaning to me and just because the United Nations has fallen on hard times doesn't make Bolton's appointment logical or deserved.  Maybe the United States government considers the United Nations useless but other countries don't and this appointment is another step in turning world opinion against the United States.

 

Here's to Bolton having changed some of his opinions since that rant of his was recorded.

 

The ideals of the UN are just words on a paper anymore, and have been for a long time. All you have to do is look at their handling of Africa over the history of the UN and tell me what their ideals are good for. It hasn't mattered who the US has sent up there, as they turn the same blind eye to genocide, as they will with Bolton up there.

[KipWellsFan]

Not really scared of him, but how he's going to reflect upon his own country. Like I mentioned earlier he has said in the past that the United Nations only works when the United States wants it to and when it is in the United States interest.

[YASNY]

Not really scared of him, but how he's going to reflect upon his own country.  Like I mentioned earlier he has said in the past that the United Nations only works when the United States wants it to and when it is in the United States interest.

 

My kind of guy!

[KipWellsFan]

*mockingly saluting Yasny*

[juddling]

Not really scared of him, but how he's going to reflect upon his own country.  Like I mentioned earlier he has said in the past that the United Nations only works when the United States wants it to and when it is in the United States interest.

 

 

Do you really think that the ambassador of Luxembourg or Belgium worries about HOW the US representative got there?? I can see it now...the Luxembourg ambassador talking to the guy from Belgium saying "Gee...did you see how Bolton got here??? First time he speaks..let's stand up and turn our backs on him. That will show 'em. "

 

i must ask.....How do you think he will reflect the US? Are other guys going to say "He's a bully..we won't deal with the US." or what?? AS far as i can tell..they already have that opinion about us.

 

 

 

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Do you really think that the ambassador of Luxembourg or Belgium worries about HOW the US representative got there??  I can see it now...the Luxembourg ambassador talking to the guy from Belgium saying "Gee...did you see how Bolton got here???  First time he speaks..let's stand up and turn our backs on him.  That will show 'em. "

 

i must ask.....How do you think he will reflect the US? Are other guys going to say "He's a bully..we won't deal with the US." or what??  AS far as i can tell..they already have that opinion about us.

 

It is simply putting the "America Uber Alles" portrayal of America further into the limelight. It is speaking to the vapid, vicious and knuckle dragging nationalistic part of the American character -- One might call that hypocritical, especially from a political candidate who rammed down everybodys' throats that he was a "uniter, not a divider".

 

And as much as I don't like Bolton, I have to admit -- it is an upgrade from John "I ::Heart:: Central American Death Squads" Negroponte. I hate that prick a lot more.

[KipWellsFan]

Do you really think that the ambassador of Luxembourg or Belgium worries about HOW the US representative got there??  I can see it now...the Luxembourg ambassador talking to the guy from Belgium saying "Gee...did you see how Bolton got here???  First time he speaks..let's stand up and turn our backs on him.  That will show 'em. "

 

i must ask.....How do you think he will reflect the US? Are other guys going to say "He's a bully..we won't deal with the US." or what??  AS far as i can tell..they already have that opinion about us.

 

 

How he got there? That's for the democrats to argue. It's what he stands for that will reflect poorly upon America. But if all Americans like you didn't really care how the World thought of you then I wouldn't either.

Edited August 2, 2005 by KipWellsFan

[FlaSoxxJim]

It is simply putting the "America Uber Alles" portrayal of America further into the limelight.  It is speaking to the vapid, vicious and knuckle dragging nationalistic part of the American character -- One might call that hypocritical, especially from a political candidate who rammed down everybodys' throats that he was a "uniter, not a divider".

 

And as much as I don't like Bolton, I have to admit -- it is an upgrade from John "I ::Heart:: Central American Death Squads" Negroponte.  I hate that prick a lot more.

Up With Knuckle-Dragging Nationalism!!!

[Balta1701]

I have a serious question for those of you here that are speaking out AGAINST Bolton.  What are you afraid he is going to do?  Or not do?  And please, don't spout off the party line, we have all heard that one before, just as we have all heard what he WILL do for us.  Inquiring minds want to know!

There is a long list of issues that are going to come up before the UN which Bolton could, through his personality or individual behavior, make worse for the U.S.

 

Start with Iran. They're about to restart their uranium enrichment program again. If negotiations between the 3 European powers and Iran fail to shut it down, the only option the U.S. will have left will be the U.N. A Security Council resolution could be enough to force Iran to back down, especially if it contains a genuine threat. But if you're unwilling/unable to negotiate with a person in good faith, that resolution never happens.

 

Aside from that, you can basically pick your issue, and there's a dozen ways that a single person in Bolton's chair could screw it up. Negotiating for more aid to Iraq. Negotiating for additional measures against Al Qaeda groups in Asia. Arranging for the UN to do something about the Sudan. Trying to convince nations to increase aid to African countries. Trying to get condemnation from the UN on acts of violence against Israel. Reforming the UN itself. And so on.

 

These are all issues before the UN, and they're all issues that the U.S. will want something. In order to get that something, negotiation is going to be necessary. Bolton does not seem liek he is the sort who is either willing or able to negotiate in good faith, and his lack of support from the Senate will only exacerbate that situation.

 

My question to the pro-Bolton folks is this; Bolton has lied to Congress, harassed and possibly even threatened subordinates, done damage to this nation's efforts against WMD proliferation, and couldn't even get out of committee with a positive reccomendation. Is the political right on this country so devoid of people who can't stand the UN that they have to pick this guy as the only one who can help reform that body? Seriously, is there suddenly a dearth of people on the right who can't stand the UN?

[southsider2k5]

My question to the pro-Bolton folks is this;  Bolton has lied to Congress, harassed and possibly even threatened subordinates, done damage to this nation's efforts against WMD proliferation, and couldn't even get out of committee with a positive reccomendation.  Is the political right on this country so devoid of people who can't stand the UN that they have to pick this guy as the only one who can help reform that body?  Seriously, is there suddenly a dearth of people on the right who can't stand the UN?

 

 

This is killing me, seriously I am LOL here. We have sent all of these supposed "quality" people to the UN, and what has gotten done? Seriously. We have sent all of these career politician ambassador/politicians up there, and what have we gotten? Nothing. No one follows the UN resolutions even when they can be passed. Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and India at least have gotten nuclear capablilites of one type or another, and what did the UN do to stop them? What has the UN done to stop genocide in multiple countries in Africa? What have they done to stop suicide bombing and retaliations in Israel/Palestine? Hell the UN resembles a mini-Chicago with all of the influence peddling and flat out conflicts of interest that it is supposed to be devoid of. The leader of the stinking organization is knee-deep in it himself, along with his family. With all of this crap right off of the top of my head, you are all honestly trying to tell me that Bolton is going to screw up the UN???? Now that is comedy.

 

The UN is a corrupt, self-serving, bloated, failing organization. Sending Bolton or Jesus Christ himself up there isn't going to make one bit of difference.

[Balta1701]

I wasn't saying that Bolton was going to screw up the UN, I was saying that Bolton has a very good chance of screwing up the ability of the US to get anything useful out of the UN.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and India at least have gotten nuclear capablilites of one type or another, and what did the UN do to stop them?

 

You should include Israel in that group. Or is it still supposed to be a secret?

[southsider2k5]

You should include Israel in that group.  Or is it still supposed to be a secret?

 

Sure throw Israel on there, it only strengthens my point. The UN is inept to do anything that is supposed to be doing, and one crappy nomination isn't going to make things any worse than they are already. We have sent administrations full of "yes"-men up there and got nothing but dead people all over Africa to show for it. At this point why not send someone who thinks that the UN is doing it wrong up there. I though the first step in solving a problem was admitting that you have a problem? To be honest, nothing I have heard out of the UN really sounds like they even think anything is wrong with the way things have been going.

[southsider2k5]

I wasn't saying that Bolton was going to screw up the UN, I was saying that Bolton has a very good chance of screwing up the ability of the US to get anything useful out of the UN.

 

I don't think much useful has come out of the UN for a long time anyway.

[Balta1701]

Sure throw Israel on there, it only strengthens my point.  The UN is inept to do anything that is supposed to be doing, and one crappy nomination isn't going to make things any worse than they are already.  We have sent administrations full of "yes"-men up there and got nothing but dead people all over Africa to show for it.  At this point why not send someone who thinks that the UN is doing it wrong up there.  I though the first step in solving a problem was admitting that you have a problem?  To be honest, nothing I have heard out of the UN really sounds like they even think anything is wrong with the way things have been going.

I don't see a problem with anything you've said there. Why not let Bush send up a conservative guy who thinks the UN is doing it all wrong? Can't hurt to try.

 

But Bolton is not just a guy who thinks the UN is doing it all wrong, he also seems to be a terrible person. It's been alleged repeatedly in several different places where he served that he harassed underlings. He lied to the Senate when they asked if he had testified recently in any investigations. One of Bush II's state department appointees said Bolton was a "Serial abuser". Up and down the list, it seems no one has been able to work with the guy. He has been implicated repeatedly in eitehr spinning or falsifying intelligence to support his beliefs on Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. And the Bush Administration has a bunch of documents they're hiding that are apparently so damaging that they would rather give Bolton a recess appointment than have him get an up or down vote in the Senate.

 

Bush can appoint a guy who thinks the UN is doing everything wrong any time he wants. It probably couldn't hurt to try...you're right. But to me, that's not what this case is about. This is about Bush appointing the single worst possible guy to the UN to do that job. I'm totally serious when I ask whether the right has somehow run out of guys who dislike the UN and Bolton is the only one left. His career is a nightmare. He appears totally unqualified to remain in public service based on all of the testimony and information that has come out. So I ask...why is he the Only one who can get it done? Does the Bush administration somehow not have enough guys who dislike the UN that they can't find one who dislikes it but hasn't chased people aroudn a hotel like a "Madman"?