US to leave the UN?

[Skoob]

Thanks, that helps clear that up. And I found a wiki entry on black helicopters that was fairly detailed.

My wife and I both noticed these signs the other day and were like, WTF?

One homemade sign near Cotton, MN has a hand painted dog pissing on the UN flag/symbol. This particular property has a history of inflammatory signs. Some past gems have included, "Our governor is a bigger cry-baby than your governor (criticizing former governor Jesse Ventura) and "punt the poodles" (criticizing the French).

[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
There was a fear among far right wing elements in America that the American government was being weakened and taken over by the UN. Foreigners were going to start dictating American policy and arresting American citizens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that really a "far right" issue? Anyone who is of a Libertarian nature would naturally, by extension, be opposed to every level of government as it extends away from the individual. With some people it might be a "USA all the way!" type of attitude, but I think overall it's a more Libertarian-minded than a neo-con, far right position.


EDIT: I just realized that it looks like you were talking about just the helicopters (and the meaninglessness thereof), and not internationalism in general.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There was a fear among far right wing elements in America that the American government was being weakened and taken over by the UN. Foreigners were going to start dictating American policy and arresting American citizens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that really a "far right" issue? Anyone who is of a Libertarian nature would naturally, by extension, be opposed to every level of government as it extends away from the individual. With some people it might be a "USA all the way!" type of attitude, but I think overall it's a more Libertarian-minded than a neo-con, far right position.


EDIT: I just realized that it looks like you were talking about just the helicopters (and the meaninglessness thereof), and not internationalism in general.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I think that the neo-cons do not greatly fear the U.N. or globalization or perhaps even global government. Neo-cons generally seem to have a pro-globalist outlook. The Paleo-cons and Traditionalist Conservatives fear such things, as do those who care about national sovereignty. Libertarians may fear such things on the basis that the U.N. is just one more way that government and organizations aim to take away individual rights.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I think that the neo-cons do not greatly fear the U.N. or globalization or perhaps even global government. Neo-cons generally seem to have a pro-globalist outlook.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree that the neo-cons are actually pro-globalist, but they want it on their terms with the American government leading the way, rather then the UN.
Project for the new American Century

[Misfire]

[ QUOTE ]
The UN has an important stabilizing influence on the world and its charitable tasks like UNICEF and the WHO are important for improving the lives of billions of people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, all those places that were unstable before the UN was formed are so peaceful and prosperous now.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The UN has an important stabilizing influence on the world and its charitable tasks like UNICEF and the WHO are important for improving the lives of billions of people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, all those places that were unstable before the UN was formed are so peaceful and prosperous now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, we gave the UN a solid half of a century to change the world and establish fully international peace. Man have they failed; time to pack up and go home.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The UN has an important stabilizing influence on the world and its charitable tasks like UNICEF and the WHO are important for improving the lives of billions of people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, all those places that were unstable before the UN was formed are so peaceful and prosperous now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, we gave the UN a solid half of a century to change the world and establish fully international peace. Man have they failed; time to pack up and go home.

[/ QUOTE ].

The U.N. failed to prevent all of the largest scale slaughters which humanity suffered through in the second half of the 20th century. It is not currently preventing the worst ongoing slaughters in the world. I see no reason to suppose that the U.N. will succeed at preventing slaughters of similar (or larger) scale in the future, do you? Hope alone does not qualify as a reason but rather as wishful thinking.

If you have any actual reasons why you believe the U.N. should be likely to succeed in the future, in contrast to its proven pattern of consistent failures, I would be interested to hear those reasons.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
If you have any actual reasons why you believe the U.N. should be likely to succeed in the future, in contrast to its proven pattern of consistent failures, I would be interested to hear those reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends upon what you think the objectives of the UN ought to be. If you think it should be a forum for countries to discuss and attempt to cooperate on an international level, then it does that very nicely. If you think it should be a global police force, then it doesn't do that well (not that it was ever intended to be that.)

[BigBuffet]

The UN has succeeded in it's unstated mission: to destabilize various regions and make them susceptible to World Bank and IMF funding and resulting puppet status.

[BigBadBabar]

lol at seeing some anti un signs in a cornfield and translating that into a huge nationwide movement + possible coup