UN Messenger of Peace (Trees And Things)

skeptic: Re: isolationism vs. interventionism

Sat, 9 Feb 2008 09:08:48 EST

Sure, we must not forget the lessons learned by our grandparents. Indeed, we must not forget all the lessons of history, extending back for many thousands of years. And there are all sorts of different lessons to learn. We have learned th

novy: Re: isolationism vs. interventionism

Fri, 8 Feb 2008 13:22:47 EST

With respect to Hussein's intentions, remember that prior to his invasion of Kuwait he invaded Iran in hope of taking control of its oil assets in its southwestern territories, which were and remain to this day largely inhabited by Arabs. There can't be mu

skeptic: Re: isolationism vs. interventionism

Fri, 8 Feb 2008 09:56:05 EST

One may well wonder whether it would really have been good or bad for the Arab nations to allow Saddam Hussein to pursue the expansionist program that he began with the annexation of Kuwait (and we don't really know for certain that he would have gone on t

novy: Re: But

Thu, 7 Feb 2008 22:05:27 EST

Quoting from "Banker's Manifesto of 1892" makes almost as much sense as quoting from "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion". Even Ron Paul has more recent stuff to serve as grist for his hatred of Federal Reserve System.

thefadd: But

Thu, 7 Feb 2008 21:15:22 EST

The question of tariff reform must be urged through the organization known as the Democratic Party, and the question of protection with the reciprocity must be forced to view through the Republica

novy: Re: isolationism vs. interventionism

Thu, 7 Feb 2008 21:03:43 EST
While I certainly agree that US would be well advised to cut back on its current interventionist policies, I would also suggest that it gains substantially from cooperating with other countries in keeping world peace through UN action, which was my actual

skeptic: isolationism vs. interventionism

Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:01:06 EST
I find your comment a bit ironic, when you tell me that "if (the) world started to go to hell in a hand basket, (the) money you saved by withdrawing from the world would look like chickenfeed...)" since it appears to me that the world is already going to h

novy: Re: US Trivia

Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:46:15 EST
Genuinely isolationist foreign policy does represent third option, but when you tried that after World War I it didn't last even one generation. Powerful countries seldom can detach themselves completely from world affairs, although China would provide one

skeptic: Re: US Trivia

Wed, 6 Feb 2008 10:30:08 EST
There is a third option, besides the ones you present, of either the UN keeping the peace (or at least attempting to do so) throughout the world, or the US taking on that task all by itself. The US could also, at least in theory, revert to its former

novy: Re: US Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 15:30:09 EST
Yeah, and NATO peacekeepers are doing a bang-up job in Afghanistan. Their presence alone stands between Muslim extremist rule and ... well, different Muslim extremist rule. They sure have Taliban on run. But when US screws up some war, or when NATO screws

gerrymander: Re: US Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:51:51 EST
Yeah, the UN peacekeepers are doing a bang-up job in Sudan. Their presence alone is preventing a genocide!Or at least, preventing a "genocide," because the ethnicity-based killing is still going on in job lots, but the UN determined that doesn't qualify as

novy: Re: UN Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 14:22:25 EST
Just throw them out of your country! Every right-thinking American knows UN sucks. You didn't need them for cover during Korean War, you don't need them to provide troops in 17 countries today and countless others in past. Chad, Central African Repu

gerrymander: Re: UN Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 13:52:27 EST
Gee, maybe if we paid our UN dues, they could get that roof fixed.
Not bloody likely.
A few years back, Donald Trump -- you know, the guy who epitomizes wealthy extravagance -- t

zyxwvutsr: Re: UN Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 13:40:17 EST

Gee, maybe if we paid our UN dues, they could get that roof fixed
Maybe. There never seems to be a shortage of money for parties at the UN, however, so it's probably more a question of priorities.

zyxwvutsr: Re: US Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 13:38:17 EST

Did you know that if US decided to spend its infinite military resources taking UN's place in every peacekeeping mission on Earth and sent everyone else home, you would already be facing bankruptcy?
No, I did not know that.

PenitenziAgite: Re: UN Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:45:31 EST
Gee, maybe if we paid our UN dues, they could get that roof fixed.

novy: Re: UN Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:44:40 EST
Maybe not, but now that you have tipped everyone off, escape from 7 train into UN will undoubtedly show up as plot twist in upcoming spy-related UN-related George Clooney movie.
Did you know that if US decided to spend its infinite military resources ta

novy: Re: George Clooney, next Secretary-General.

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:40:21 EST
How could the UN overlook the obvious: George Clooney to replace Ban Ki-moon? Who was Ban Ki-moon anyway? What has he done lately? Who cares what he does next?
George Clooney might make UN relevant again. At least US women would have more respect for it

zyxwvutsr: Re: UN Trivia

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 11:02:22 EST
Did you know that the UN headquarters building was so poorly designed, built, and maintained that the roof leaks when it rains? Yeah, true story.
Also, the 7 train of the NYC subway system runs directly under the UN, and there is an escape hatch for the

MayorBob: George Clooney, meh.

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:51:48 EST
How could the UN overlook the obvious, Omar Bin Laden -- son of you know who? Why he's even scheduled a horse race for peace and plans on meeting with the