RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail?

RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 6:06:08 PM)
Shush keep it quiet you don't want the Russians to find out Obama was telling porkies about START II. They've already committed to it, whilst the US is still voting as to if it wants to.

SL4V3M4YB3 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 6:12:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 So where's all that "good will" for Obama that everyone was talking about? You mean foreign countries still expect a check to "like" President Obama? I'd love to lose the Somalian "market" for our chow! No they expect international agreements to mean something. When your republican senators are voting for political gain perhaps you should consider what damage they are doing to your word and reputation, for follow through, on the international stage.

AsmodaisSin -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 6:20:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 So where's all that "good will" for Obama that everyone was talking about? You mean foreign countries still expect a check to "like" President Obama? I'd love to lose the Somalian "market" for our chow! No they expect international agreements to mean something. When your republican senators are voting for political gain perhaps you should consider what damage they are doing to your word and reputation, for follow through, on the international stage. With all due respect...really?! Obama made promises to the international world without first consulting the American people or our representatives. Gosh, while our president is making this promise, maybe he could promise to fund other outrageous things and expect the vast majority of the population to just take it. Of course, I'm sure after all of his shenanigans, Obama expected that he'd still have his super majorities. He's probably still scratching his head about losing Massachusetts or sticking to blaming the democrat.

LadyEllen -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 6:27:34 PM)
hmmmm. so then, let me get this straight. Obama can do nothing at all, despite being elected by the people, except by leave of others elected two years earlier? And therefore anything that can be ascribed to him is not his act at all, but the act of congress? How come everything under the sun is Obama's fault? E

blacksword404 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 7:05:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 So where's all that "good will" for Obama that everyone was talking about? You mean foreign countries still expect a check to "like" President Obama? I'd love to lose the Somalian "market" for our chow! No they expect international agreements to mean something. When your republican senators are voting for political gain perhaps you should consider what damage they are doing to your word and reputation, for follow through, on the international stage. I think more damage was done to our reputation when the president nixed that missle defense shield in poland. He fed them to the bear.

kushiels -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 7:07:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SL4V3M4YB3 quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 So where's all that "good will" for Obama that everyone was talking about? You mean foreign countries still expect a check to "like" President Obama? I'd love to lose the Somalian "market" for our chow! No they expect international agreements to mean something. When your republican senators are voting for political gain perhaps you should consider what damage they are doing to your word and reputation, for follow through, on the international stage. They aren't doing anything to MY word, b/c while I MAY have voted for Obama, I didn't go to the UN and promise reductions. Obama did, and to keep my respect (should he care to do so), he should do his best to keep his word. Not his fault if the congress doesn't go along. Yeah, I agree that international agreements should mean something. I don't think he should have made the "pledge" (I don't have any idea how "formally" he pledged it or not), since it's not actually in his power to DO. Not the way our government is set up. But, sorry, his inability to do something he said he would do doesn't affect my word one bit.

pahunkboy -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 7:19:37 PM)
...and another thing. I am way more credible then Obama!

asyouwish72 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 7:54:29 PM)
quote: I have to wonder quite what the UN are going to do if the promise isnt fulfilled? We're in the realms of the hard stare here folks. On the other hand Phil is right - if the word of your representative, your agent as it were, is not binding on you as a principal, then what the fuck is it worth? If he cant negotiate anything, best not send him at all. This is absolutely right. I assume that Mr. DeBoer is speaking in terms of ethics- that he feels the U.S. should try to live up to the commitments made by its leaders (otherwise talking to those leaders is a waste of time). The U.N. has no legislative power to do anything substantive. At worst, they can strongly disapprove and wag their fingers. Talk to Serbia about how scary U.N. disapproval was absent U.S. action to back it up. The obvious answer is, 'not very'. That said, CO2 emissions will need to be dealt with sooner or later. Given the current political climate, that is almost assured to be later, to our collective detriment. While the rate of loss of Himalayan glaciers is not clearly known, this is a very real and painful phenomenon that is happening right this minute in clearly documented fashion elsewhere. For those unfamiliar with this fact, it's instructive to educate yourself on the present situation in the Bolivian Andes: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8394324.stm For the record, La Paz has been continuously occupied by Europeans for almost 500 years (it was founded in its present form in 1548) and was the site of an indigenous population center previous to this. At no point in that period has there been a glacial retreat and resultant loss of water supply like the one presently observed. To contravene the argument that this is a local effect, bear in mind that Mount Kilimanjaro- thousands of miles away on another continent- has lost more than 85% of the ice cover present in 1912, with 25% of that loss coming in the last 10 years. It's also worth noting that ExxonMobil- a group that one would expect to be climate skeptics themselves- is certain enough of a moderating arctic climate to bet a billion dollars (yes, with a 'b') on it: http://industry.bnet.com/energy/10002753/arctic-oil-ambitions-exxon-eyes-1-bln-transocean-rig/ They sure are going to be pissed after they spend all that money and find out global climate change is a hoax. I could go on (and on... and on... and on...). Opinions generally trump facts, though, so what would be the point?

AsmodaisSin -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 8:03:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen hmmmm. so then, let me get this straight. Obama can do nothing at all, despite being elected by the people, except by leave of others elected two years earlier? And therefore anything that can be ascribed to him is not his act at all, but the act of congress? How come everything under the sun is Obama's fault? E How come everything was Bush's fault? Ever think of that one?

luckydawg -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 9:10:58 PM)
Yeah you really should get this stuff straight. You are obviously an intelligent person, but you are coming off as very ignorant. I made some corrections in red for you. quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen hmmmm. so then, let me get this straight. Obama can do nothing at all(no he has specifc defined powers, which do not include unilaterally declaring binding commitments, no one has said he can do nothing. YOu are pulling that out of your ass for some reason), despite being elected by the people(he is elected by the electoral college), except by leave of others elected two years earlier(senators serve for 6 years not 2)? And therefore anything that can be ascribed to him is not his act at all, but the act of congress( the President can unilaterally do some things, but most actions and policies of the USA are determined by the President and Congress passing a law, it takes both to make it happen. Though the Congress can overrule the President)? How come everything under the sun is Obama's fault? (Only ignorant people think that, about any president. However, when a president has a recent mandate, and his party has a supermajority, he has more power and culpability) E

kdsub -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 9:24:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY "Whatever route is taken, the president of the United States committed to a 17 percent emissions reduction in Copenhagen," de Boer said. "The president of the United States committed to more ambitious emissions reductions for 2030 and 2050. And it is those statements to which the international community will hold the government of the United States accountable." Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? Firm quote: ...none of the above. Just the rest of the world suggesting that the word of the Democratically elected US head of state ought to stand for something. Common sense without an official treaty should tell you that his pledge is good for two years at best...It is the nature of the beast in our adversarial government. Butch

popeye1250 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/21/2010 10:39:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen hmmmm. so then, let me get this straight. Obama can do nothing at all, despite being elected by the people, except by leave of others elected two years earlier? And therefore anything that can be ascribed to him is not his act at all, but the act of congress? How come everything under the sun is Obama's fault? E Lady E, he was in Copenhagen, IT DOESN'T COUNT! Obama's not stupid, he surely knows that "global warming" is a money scam. All those third world countries "leaders" and "Kings" were there trying to swindle money out of the West had nothing to do with the "global warming" scam, they were too busy running their own swindles, most of them probably never heard of "global warming!" They probably couldn't give a shit less! They should have had air conditioners as door prizes for the third worlders! "Here, now you can wear all those fur coats in your tents in Crapistan that you flew up to London in a private jet to buy using foreign aid money!" C'mon people! It was all about the "U.N." trying to get more money from the West for the third worlders! I'm sure Merceds Benz had a booth there along with all the Swiss watchmakers, Gucci, Lamborghini, all the big French houses, and yes Hummer. I mean they had to IMPORT what, 1,400 LIMOSINES? Everyone was scamming EVERYONE there! And who's money do you think paid for all that partying, gourmet food eating, discoing at night and whoring around? They had to import hookers for cripes sake! Remember a few years back when they had it in S. Africa and the homeless "hit the jackpot" by dumpster diving for left over Lobster and Prime Rib? I doubt Obama even wanted to be in Copenhagen! He didn't stay long did he? lol Can you blame him? Having a bunch of strangers with funny accents and questionable backgrounds tugging at your coat and sleeves asking you for money! The poor guy! "Hillary, YOU are the Secy of State, next time YOU go and promise them whatever you want." These things are Junkets, those people go there to "Party!" If they had it in the summer you wouldn't be able to get on a golf course within 50 miles! THAT's what it's all about! A bunch of rich people trying their best to get your money! And if anyone wants to give money to prevent something that doesn't exist they have fucking rocks in their head! "Global warming! Are you shittin' me?

NorthernGent -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/22/2010 1:09:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But, in reality, the only thing that "makes' nations do the things that "they say" is self-interest. That's the basis of all international agreements and understandings. All else is fantasy and wishful thinking. Firm Give the lad his dues.....honest as the day is long. Which is great because now we can drop the pretence of US aid in the interests of other countries and the idea that the US wants to help the people of Iraq. Ain't that right Firmhand.

TreasureKY -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/22/2010 7:52:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But, in reality, the only thing that "makes' nations do the things that "they say" is self-interest. That's the basis of all international agreements and understandings. All else is fantasy and wishful thinking. Firm Give the lad his dues.....honest as the day is long. Which is great because now we can drop the pretence of US aid in the interests of other countries and the idea that the US wants to help the people of Iraq. Ain't that right Firmhand. Firm is taking some well deserved rest right now, NG. I can't speak for him, but I would ask that you consider this... Is it inconceivable to think that charitable actions and self-interest might go hand-in-hand?

rulemylife -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/22/2010 8:19:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AsmodaisSin With all due respect...really?! Obama made promises to the international world without first consulting the American people or our representatives. Gosh, while our president is making this promise, maybe he could promise to fund other outrageous things and expect the vast majority of the population to just take it. Uh, yes..........really. See, when we elect someone to represent us they don't need to come back and ask permission for every decision they make.

DomImus -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/22/2010 9:26:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY U.S. Bound by Obama's Copenhagen Emissions Pledge -- U.N. Official By LISA FRIEDMAN of Greenwire Published: January 20, 2010 The United Nations will hold President Obama to his promise that the United States will reduce carbon emissions even if the Senate cannot pass climate legislation, U.N. climate chief Yvo de Boer said this morning. In his first public comments since the Copenhagen climate summit last month that produced a nonbinding promise from major-emitting countries to cut greenhouse gases, de Boer noted that Obama vowed the United States will slash carbon about 17 percent below 2005 levels in the coming decade. Yesterday's special election in Massachusetts, in which a Republican won the Senate seat formerly held by the late Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy since 1962, calls into question Congress' ability to pass a cap-and-trade bill, but it does not alter the U.S. commitment, de Boer said. ... "Whatever route is taken, the president of the United States committed to a 17 percent emissions reduction in Copenhagen," de Boer said. "The president of the United States committed to more ambitious emissions reductions for 2030 and 2050. And it is those statements to which the international community will hold the government of the United States accountable." Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? Ignorance... and not all on the part of the UN. Is a "nonbinding promise" anything like "sorta pregnant"?

popeye1250 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/22/2010 11:31:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But, in reality, the only thing that "makes' nations do the things that "they say" is self-interest. That's the basis of all international agreements and understandings. All else is fantasy and wishful thinking. Firm Give the lad his dues.....honest as the day is long. Which is great because now we can drop the pretence of US aid in the interests of other countries and the idea that the US wants to help the people of Iraq. Ain't that right Firmhand. NG, but how much longer is this going to go on the "U.N." trying to scam money out of Western countries? I mean is it going to go on like,..."forever?" Many people in the U.S. want out of the "U.N." for any number of reasons, I don't know why "our govt" doesn't or doesn't want to listen to The People on this. Any articles in all those British tabloids about all the hookers who went to Copenhagen from all around Europe? They must have made a killing!

NorthernGent -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/23/2010 4:17:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But, in reality, the only thing that "makes' nations do the things that "they say" is self-interest. That's the basis of all international agreements and understandings. All else is fantasy and wishful thinking. Firm Give the lad his dues.....honest as the day is long. Which is great because now we can drop the pretence of US aid in the interests of other countries and the idea that the US wants to help the people of Iraq. Ain't that right Firmhand. Firm is taking some well deserved rest right now, NG. I can't speak for him, but I would ask that you consider this... Is it inconceivable to think that charitable actions and self-interest might go hand-in-hand? I've considered it Treasure....and.... The two of you are most certainly well versed in Machiavelli's concept of the state.

NorthernGent -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/23/2010 4:32:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But, in reality, the only thing that "makes' nations do the things that "they say" is self-interest. That's the basis of all international agreements and understandings. All else is fantasy and wishful thinking. Firm Give the lad his dues.....honest as the day is long. Which is great because now we can drop the pretence of US aid in the interests of other countries and the idea that the US wants to help the people of Iraq. Ain't that right Firmhand. NG, but how much longer is this going to go on the "U.N." trying to scam money out of Western countries? I mean is it going to go on like,..."forever?" Many people in the U.S. want out of the "U.N." for any number of reasons, I don't know why "our govt" doesn't or doesn't want to listen to The People on this. Any articles in all those British tabloids about all the hookers who went to Copenhagen from all around Europe? They must have made a killing! Popeye......do you honestly think the United States or any other nation will hand over money with no strings attached? The UN is another 'enemy' along the lines of all the other 'enemies' - the intention being to retain a common cause - something the United States political system has strived to maintain (since the founders looked at the United Provinces and admired their civil liberties but rejected their position as a disparate and weak nation open to attack from outsiders). Fair enough - you have a history of rejecting international law - nothing wrong with that as it's your call as a nation - but let's call it what it is and it's certainly not the UN or anyone else scamming the United States. Your lot should just withdraw from the whole thing - it seems that you don't particularly like being subject to international law so why not just pull out all together? I'd estimate it's because you want to have your cake and eat it - you want the benefits that come from international agreements but don't want to be beholden to it when it doesn't suit (mind you - very much like Britain and the EU). As per Treasure above - when it suits and when it doesn't suit. Just pull out of the fuckin' thing and go your own way. Plain and simple. No idea with the whores in Copenhagen - British politicians seem to have a penchant for rent boys - so expect to see a motion from the British delegates rejecting the discrimination attached to an inexpensive and available fuck.

popeye1250 -> RE: UN to the US: Ignorance, hubris, or attempted blackmail? (1/23/2010 7:26:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY But, in reality, the only thing that "makes' nations do the things that "they say" is self-interest. That's the basis of all international agreements and understandings. All else is fantasy and wishful thinking. Firm Give the lad his dues.....honest as the day is long. Which is great because now we can drop the pretence of US aid in the interests of other countries and the idea that the US wants to help the people of Iraq. Ain't that right Firmhand. NG, but how much longer is this going to go on the "U.N." trying to scam money out of Western countries? I mean is it going to go on like,..."forever?" Many people in the U.S. want out of the "U.N." for any number of reasons, I don't know why "our govt" doesn't or doesn't want to listen to The People on this. Any articles in all those British tabloids about all the hookers who went to Copenhagen from all around Europe? They must have made a killing! Popeye......do you honestly think the United States or any other nation will hand over money with no strings attached? The UN is another 'enemy' along the lines of all the other 'enemies' - the intention being to retain a common cause - something the United States political system has strived to maintain (since the founders looked at the United Provinces and admired their civil liberties but rejected their position as a disparate and weak nation open to attack from outsiders). Fair enough - you have a history of rejecting international law - nothing wrong with that as it's your call as a nation - but let's call it what it is and it's certainly not the UN or anyone else scamming the United States. Your lot should just withdraw from the whole thing - it seems that you don't particularly like being subject to international law so why not just pull out all together? I'd estimate it's because you want to have your cake and eat it - you want the benefits that come from international agreements but don't want to be beholden to it when it doesn't suit (mind you - very much like Britain and the EU). As per Treasure above - when it suits and when it doesn't suit. Just pull out of the fuckin' thing and go your own way. Plain and simple. No idea with the whores in Copenhagen - British politicians seem to have a penchant for rent boys - so expect to see a motion from the British delegates rejecting the discrimination attached to an inexpensive and available fuck. N.G. we don't need to be in the "U.N." to have agreements with other countries. Remember "lend/lease?" And indeed let's call it what it is, a huge, unneccessary, unresponsive buearacracy that sucks money from it's members. Look at NATO, it's sole reason for existance ceased to exist twenty years ago and now it's.....Bigger! That's the thing about buearacracies, they all seek to perpetuate themselves and grow ever larger and get into areas where they have no business being. The military calls that, "mission creep." And the "U.N." is supposed to be a "deliberative body", not a "legislative body" like Parliment or our Congress. The best they can do is make "resolutions" which nobody listens to anyway. As a U.S. Citizen I just don't want my govt. involved with the "U.N." If we had a binding proposition on the ballot in all 50 states to get out of the "U.N." it would pass overwhelmingly. Everyone knows that yet our govt is deaf when it comes to listening to The People. Hell, have a non-binding proposition just to see how The People think! And look at all this "global warming" nonsense! Sure, "diplomats" can sit down and come up with a "cure" for that alright! Only all their "solutions" involve getting "more money" from Western countries! That's all they know how to do! "Plan A, get more money out of Western countries." "Plan Z, get more money out of Western countries!" And why would anyone in their right mind want the "U.N." involved with "global warming" anyway? I read that after Clinton left office the "U.N." had "amassed" a pension fund of thirty billion dollars! So we're now paying "pensions" for international buearocrats who ride around in limosines, eat lobster and prime rib and hire hookers and "rent boys?"

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625