United Nations

Can We Quit the UN Yet?


Carlos Santana cheers his UNHRC nomination

Why on Earth are Americans, unlike their enlightened comrades in Europe, so skeptical of the United Nations? I haven't a clue, though I suspect that, as Tim Cavanaugh noted a few weeks ago, it might have something to do with Iran being nominated to the UN Commission on the Status of Women. This was Tehran's Plan B, having been pressured into abandoning its bid to sit on the UN Human Rights Council. Hilarious, right? After slaughtering demonstrators in the streets, filling the torture chambers at Evin prison with students, they wanted to adjudicate on human rights violations in other countries? Silly Mullahs, those spots are resevered for countries like Switzerland, Spain, and…Libya:

Seven countries accused of human rights violations, including Libya, Angola and Malaysia, won seats on the U.N. Human Rights Council in an uncontested election Thursday.

The U.N. General Assembly approved all 14 candidates for the 14 seats on the 47-member council by wide margins despite campaigns by human rights groups to deny countries with poor rights records the minimum number of votes needed.

All 14 countries easily topped the 97 votes required from the 192-member world body. Libya, which currently holds the presidency of the General Assembly, received the lowest number of votes — 155 — while Angola got 170 and Malaysia 179.

In addition to these three countries, human rights groups criticized the poor rights records of Thailand, Uganda, Mauritania and Qatar which also won seats.

I went without booze (and fun) for a four-day, Qaddafi-funded junket in Libya last year.

NEXT: "We talked about the Citizens United case and she said she thought the court was not sufficiently deferential to Congress."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Anybody notice that Iran is still holding three U.S. citizens as hostages?

    1. Do you acknowledge that the United States has frequently meddled in the internal affairs of Iran?

      What grant of power is there in the constitution authorizing the federal government to lead an international crusade to deprive the Iranians of nuclear energy and weapons?

      I forget, little ole’ Mahmoud is the “HItler of our time.”

      1. This justifies taking hostages?

      2. Considering that one of the Founding Fathers ordered a naval assault on a Muslim country that was irritating US shipping merchants, with no declaration of war, I’d say the constitution is A-OK with the feds dealing with foreign countries as they wish.

        1. I have an idea…

        2. Muslim country that was irritating US shipping merchants

          So that’s what pirates do? “Irritate” shippers?
          It sounds so, so Johnny Depp!

      3. Try the Constitutional duty to prevent followers of a religion which kills non believers from attacking us.


      4. Why should a government that oppresses a state’s population and threatens citizens of this country and US allies enjoy sovereignty?

        Lay off the moral equivalence. It rots your brain.

        1. Lay off the empire’s kool-aid, intellectual lightweight.

          1. You didn’t address his point, nor the point of the article. What really matters here is that a country that systematically and openly engages in jailing and torturing political prisoners was even considered for a place on a council aimed at protecting human rights. Failing that, this same country that systematically and openly mistreats women has a seat at the table for discussing how to improve women’s rights and basic gender equality. Empire shmempire; “But the US is evil!!!!” is not a blanket excuse for this crap.

            1. The point is that the United States has no business lecturing Iran. The United States is a nation that systematically jails and tortures far more individuals than Iran.

              Of course, the United States has no business funding the United Nations or hosting it.

      5. Article I , sections 7-10, and Article II, section 2.

        The government’s power outside the US is unlimited. As P.J. O’Rourke put it, “whatever it is the government does, sensible Americans would prefer that the government do it to somebody else.”

  2. Will we pull out of the UN in my lifetime? I doubt it. We can’t even get our leaders to grow a spine regarding domestic issues.

    1. Will we pull out of the UN in my lifetime? I doubt it.

      Don’t be so hasty. In recent history the one use the US has for the UN, which is to bless foreign adventurism, has been a flop for both the Clinton administration and the Bush administration.

      If they won’t say yes to wars Dems and Reps want what use do they have for them?

  3. fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck the UN.

  4. Caption: “Play ‘Free Bird’!”

    1. FTW!

    2. “I’m Rick James, bitch!”

      1. That’s one of the funniest TV bits ever.

    3. “And the Woody for best actor in an anal scene goes to…Ron Jeremy!”

      1. I met that guy in LA once. He’s even hairier in person.

        1. He has a look alike that works for the TSA at Oakland International Airport. I wonder if they’ve sent him through the body scanner yet to see how much of a look alike he really is…

          1. He used to have another look-alike that drove a shuttle bus at UT-Austin in the early ’90s- back before he had the mainstream recognition that he has now.

            Every time I got on the bus I was looking for the camera and listening for the bass-heavy soundtrack.

      2. I write something that has woody, anal, and Ron Jeremy in it, and Warty doesn’t show within 3 minutes? WTF is going on?

        1. I was busy. Fuck you.

          1. That’s better. So “busy” for you is, what? Taking a huge dump? Eating at Chipotle and then taking a huge dump?

            1. Taking a huge dump on a catamite, maybe. I dunno.

              1. I learned the word “catamite” from L Ron Hubbard. Thanks, Scientology!

                1. The Church of Scientology does not want you to visit this site:


    4. Caption: “Play ‘Free Bird’!”

      Here you go.

      Something tells me this isn’t what you had in mind, though. :-p

      1. Wow…

      2. May Skynyrd forgive you.

      3. That’s just wrong.

      4. how dare you?

  5. The answer is “not by the hair of progressives’ chinny-chin-chins. It’s all in the name of furthering understanding across cultures, don’t you know that?

    Seriously though, I have the same question for people who act surprised over the latest U.N. gaff, outrage or scandal as I do for people who seem taken aback every time The New York TImes’ leftist bias gets outed in spectacular fashion – how could this come as a surprise?

    1. They’re not surprised. They’re mildly excited.

  6. If I were Libyan, I’d feel embarrassed to have a leader as ugly as that guy.

    1. If you were Libyan, you probably would hope to never see that guy, ever. I can imagine that when Col Q shows up at your doorstep, it’s not a good sign.

    2. He could get it on with Kagan.

      1. Not enough Viagra in the universe……

        1. For Kagan, that is…

  7. I don’t have a problem with the UN as an argie-bargie place where diplomats can get together to try to settle various disputes etc. After all, as Chuchill said, “Jaw-Jaw is better than War-War” (mind you that only sounds right in Winnie’s voice).

    What I can’t stand are the myriad agencies and commisions (UNICEF, UNHRC – referenced in the post – etc).

    Every one of them is a nest of thieves and busybodies. No one can deal with them without their treasure or their freedom being in peril.

    Although, in fairness, I suppose the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees deserves something of a pass, though their record, like most bureaucracies is less than stellar.

    And while the The Universal Declaration of Human Rights contains much that is high minded it tends to degenerate into a bunch of socialist entitlements or into platitudes that tend to get interpretted as such..

    1. I’m okay with the U.N. for the same reason, but I think it needs to be dramatically reduced in scope. And I’d prefer that we liberal nations actually require other liberal nations to run committees on human rights.

      1. or just not have fucking committees. As Heinlein put it “the only creature with many bellies and no brain” or something like.

        1. “A committe is a life form with six or more legs and no brain.”

          Time Enought for Love; Second Intermission.

        2. Moooooooo!

  8. Can We Quit the UN Yet?

    And where, pray tell, would all those Social Studies graduates go to find a job – in the private sector? P-l-e-a-s-s-s-e!

    1. Media Matters?

    2. Starbucks?

  9. “Why on Earth are Americans, unlike their enlightened comrades in Europe, so skeptical of the United Nations?”

    It made a lot more sense before Bush the Lesser burned the bridge behind the idea of using the United Nations as the perfect exit strategy in the wake of any future US led invasion.

    Oh! Wouldn’t it have been nice if we could have pulled out of Iraq circa 2004 and let the UN deal with the aftermath? But noooOOOOOooooo! The Bush Administration was so convinced post-Iraq would be a cake walk, they didn’t need any help from anyone! …not for that.

    But, yeah, now that there’s mucho precedent for the rest of the world to stay way off the hook to clean up our messes, I don’t see why the UN is particularly useful anymore.

    I mean, why would an organization that’s set up to give us a made to order legitimate exit strategy when necessary be useful?

    Because nation building sucks–that’s why! Why, why did he throw that away?

    Just throw it in the pile with all the rest of the evidence showing that George W. Bush was dumber than Lou Ferrigno.

    P.S. How does Lou Ferrigno feel about Bush’s bailouts? Anybody know? If he’s against them? Well then you can throw that in the pile too.

    1. Why, why did he throw that away?

      I think it was because Dick told him to.

    2. The UN was never capable of taking over in Iraq, they pulled out of their headquarters in Iraq when the first suicide bomber hit.

      The US also tried to turn Afghanistan over to NATO and that failed too.

      Best thing for the US is stop invading other countries so it won’t get stuck with nation building since there is no one to turn the mess over too.

      1. Yeah, it’s all about Iraq…and it always will be?

        Plug in any country we may have to invade any time in the future–100 years from now, when nobody gives a damn about Iraq or George W. Bush anymore, we may need to invade somebody for the security of the United States–and that might be a whole lot harder to do now, ’cause some jackass president nobody remembers or cares about flushed that option down the toilet.

        In the Ecuadorean Nuclear Crisis of 2035, we may have to go it alone now–and rebuild the hellhole by ourselves now–thanks to the shortsighted stupidity of an idiot president!

        Yes, the UN is pretty much useless for US purposes now–’cause George Bush flushed that option down the toilet, probably forever. George Bush slammed the door on the UN for those purposes–and flicked them off on the way out the door–and at the time, he touted doing that as an act of sheer brilliance!

        …not a very impressive performance. I’m much more impressed by Lou Ferrigno’s performance as the Incredible Hulk.


        At least Ferrigno didn’t hamstring us strategically for years to come–so throw that in the pile too… Ferrigno should be highly offended if anyone ever called him dumber than George W. Bush.

        1. You totally ignore the fact that the UN was in Iraq and it ran after it was hit by the first suicide bomber. So no matter what G W Bush attitude toward the UN was it was never going to take over nation building in Iraq

          And as I stated even NATO was a failure in Afghanistan when it took over and the US has now had to send in tens of thousands more troops and take over the command.

          So there is no organization around to take over the mess from the US that is created by invading another country no matter what Bush had done with the US or NATO. So once the decision was made to invade then the US was up to its neck in Nation Building mess

          1. I’m not ignoring anything.

            It wasn’t the UN’s fight. At all. Why should they stay if it wasn’t their fight?

            And if you can’t get the UN on board and you don’t have a way out planned out ahead of time (other than, you know, being showered with roses), then maybe you shouldn’t go in!

            It would be one thing if it was in defense of an alliance (like in World War II) or if we’d been attacked with Iraqi anthrax or Iraq were under the control of a Taliban/Al Qaeda alliance), but other than that, you don’t go in unless you already know how you’re getting out…

            That’s what we did in Panama. That’s what we did in Gulf I. That’s the Powell Doctrine. It works. Ignoring it is extremely hazardous. I’m not particularly wild about what we did in Panama, but I love what we did afterward…

            And how ’bout Kosovo? What if Iraq were like Kosovo? Might not someting like that have put us in a better strategic position than we’re in now?

            …and if you tell me the UN (because of the French, whoever) weren’t about to sign on to Iraq, I’ll ask, were they not willing to commit to the invasion or were they not willing to commit to the aftermath? …’cause that’s two different things.

            And before you answer that question, we should try to keep in mind that at the time, the French were in the process of invading the Ivory Coast and very much wanted to use the UN as an exit strategy–which is exactly what they and the UN did in the Ivory Coast.

            The other gorilla in the room is what would have happened if we hadn’t invaded because we didn’t have a plausible exit strategy…? And despite protests to the contrary, I remain unconvinced that doing nothing was impossible. Doing nothing is quite possible–people do it all the time.

            While I certainly feel for the Iraqi people, I remain unconvinced that Saddam Hussein presented much of a security threat to the American people. And I find the logic underlying the Powell Doctrine entirely persuasive, and doesn’t that logic suggest that despite what suffering and injustice some foreign people may be suffering, if we don’t have the support or the exit strategy, etc. to pull off an occupation, then maybe that’s a problem we’re just not capable of fixing quite yet?

            It would have been different if Iraq had been behind the anthrax attack–but it wasn’t. It just wasn’t.

            1. The UN didn’t have the ability to rebuild shit – let alone in the middle of a war zone. It’s not a coincidence every time the international commiecrats decide to get a decent sized peacekeeping/nation-building mission up and running, the first country they ask for logistical, military, and financial support is the US.

              1. And isn’t that convenient?

                We get the benefit of all that legitimacy, and we’re not on the hook when things go wrong?

                We don’t have to rebuild Kosovo. And if the place blows up again, we’ll reconsider our options and do what’s best for us…

                Iraq’s all our baby now. …remember the Pottery Barn rule? The Pottery Barn rule isn’t some statute or treaty we have to follow–that’s just the way things tend to work out. Government bloat tends to cause inflation, and when you break and occupy a country–it tends to be yours to fix.

                Go ask the French why they had to go into the Ivory Coast. Having colonies may suck the most, but having former colonies still sucks too…

                And having the UN at your disposal helps with that. Sometimes having the UN at our disposal let us avoid that altogether.

                Yeah, the UN doesn’t commit to much, and certainly not over our objections–and that’s a bad thing?


                We can do what we want under UN auspices without necessarily being committed to whatever happens there after we leave–and that’s a bad thing?


        2. Dude, WTF with all the Ferrigno hate?

          1. I don’t know why people always react that way. It may be a little insensitive, but sayin’ George W. Bush is dumber than Lou Ferrigno isn’t a cut directed at Lou Ferrigno.

            1. George W. Bush is–and always has been–way smarter than any of you idiots who bash him.

              1. F*** Losertarians, May I ask how you describe your political philosophy?

              2. Stupid is as stupid does.

                …and what George W. Bush did was stupid.

                No upside to burning the bridge back to the UN–tons of downside. That was a stupid thing to do. Deal with it.

            2. “George W. Bush is–and always has been–way smarter than any of you idiots who bash him.”

              I have to admit I take a little extra pleasure in thumbing my nose at people who are so ready to defend their deity…

              It’s bad enough when they get all bent out of shape ’cause you’re talkin’ about their party–I can understand party affiliation and personal identity. …it makes me sick, but I can understand it.

              Seein’ people get bent out of shape ’cause you’re talking about one person? That’s like talkin’ to a Moonie. It’s kinda rare these days finding someone like that–it does take you back to those heady days of ’04 or so, doesn’t it?

              George W. Bush was a disgusting liberal in the mold of Lyndon Johnson. He expanded Johnson’s Great Society, he blew a war completely out of proportion, just like Johnson did, and then he went one better by blowing $350 billion or so of average working people’s future earnings to bail out Wall Street investors…

              He was a stupid, stupid man.

              Oh, and he rendered the UN practically useless where before it had been a strategic asset for American foreign policy.


              1. “Oh, and he rendered the UN practically useless where before it had been a strategic asset for American foreign policy.”

                I am certainly no fan of George W. Bush and agree with the rest of your post that I am quoting but the United Nations was mostly useless even before George W. Bush. His father DID use it “effectively” but look at the result – look at the blow-back that resulted. Someone who was once an ally of the Untied States became an archenemy and left a gaping hole in New York City.

      2. “Best thing for the US is stop invading other countries so it won’t get stuck with nation building since there is no one to turn the mess over too.”

        Not gonna argue with that to a point, but I hope the point gets across that, since the Johnson Administration, no administration has been more hostile to the principles of the Powell Doctrine than George W. Bush…

        …and the tragedies we got involved in? Were in large part a function of that hostility.

        Maybe the most important principle of the Powell Doctrine is the idea that you don’t go in until you know how you’re getting out*. And one of our best ways out is no longer available to us–and that’s largely because of the foolish decisions of the Bush Administration.

        *I think even Powell would make an exception for a foreign invasion of the United States, but that’s not what we’re talking about here.

    3. why are you dissing Lou? He talks funny because he’s deaf not because he’s stupid like Bush

      1. That’s what makes it funny.

  10. I once had a dream where the good Colonel was giving a speech. Rainclouds gathered over the assembly, and with a wave of his hand, he dispersed the clouds. The sky had never been brighter.

    That was easily the weirdest dream I can ever remember. I had to stop reading Louis Farrakhan right before bed.

    1. I would recommend against reading Farrakhan any time of the day.

      But, if you like to read paranoid ramblings then I recommend G. Gordon Liddy as an alternative.

  11. Why quit? Stay in, just stop paying the assessments.

    They want to throw us out because we won’t pay for the thing, fine; we can then expel them from New York in retaliation. Let it go back to Switzerland or something, and be an utter joke because the US isn’t a member.

    1. Why do you hate Switzerland? Send them to Iran or Libya – or even better – send them to North Korea!

      1. That would be so fucking awesome.

  12. I went without booze (and fun) for a four-day, Qaddafi-funded junket in Libya last year.

    You didn’t get to sit in the marketplace and puff hash out of huge waterpipes like in old movies?

  13. I used to think the folks at the John Birch Society were crazy. I still don’t agree with them on everything (far from it) but I am starting to think that they, at the very least, have a point.

  14. Uh-oh. Doesn’t look like Obama’s war is going so well after all.

    The top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan says the war is a draw.

    Gen. Stanley McChrystal says the momentum of the resurgent Taliban militants has been stopped. But for now, the general says, nobody is winning.

  15. RIght that actually sounds like a very good idea.


    1. Oh anonBot you can do better than that.

      1. Jommy Joey’s not the best.

  16. But who will organize the child prostitution trade when the Blue Helmets are gone? We must keep the UN around… for teh chirrens.

    1. Is the world ready for Pedobear to be Sec-Gen?

  17. “After slaughtering demonstrators in the streets, filling the torture chambers at Evin prison with students, they wanted to adjudicate on human rights violations in other countries?”

    Riiiggghhhttt. Because the US hasn’t slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocents during it’s “wars of choice” over the last 45 years. It also hasn’t imprisoned hundreds of innocent people without any rights and of course none of them were tortured. I guess it’s a good thing the US doesn’t try to tell other countries how to deal with human rights.

    I really don’t understand why the US and Iran aren’t good friends.

    1. Riiiggghhhttt. Because the US hasn’t slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocents during it’s “wars of choice” over the last 45 years.

      true enough…but we tend to be a whole lot nicer to our own citizens. I am pretty sure the intent of the human rights division of the UN tends to focus on domestic human rights. But hell i don’t know.

      Perhaps that is where the disconnect is.

      Iran is so worried about what Israel does to people across its border while the US is ever so worried about what Iran does to people within its boarders. Of course this makes the whole idea of the UN human rights division absurd.

      It is not as if it is concerned about human rights in general, only the human rights of people who can advance a particular agenda.

    2. Riiiggghhhttt. Because the US hasn’t slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocents during it’s “wars of choice” over the last 45 years. It also hasn’t imprisoned hundreds of innocent people without any rights and of course none of them were tortured. I guess it’s a good thing the US doesn’t try to tell other countries how to deal with human rights.

      In fact, it hasn’t dont any of those things, and fuck you for repeating that leftard bullshit, you pacifascist commie traitor bitch. May you be ass-raped with a running chainsaw just like all your child-molesting faggot buddies at the UN deserve to be.

      1. Wow, dude you seriously need to get back on your meds.

    3. I’ll see your “Riiiiiggggghhhhhhtttt” and raise you a “Suuuuuuuuurrrrreeeee.”

      There’s a big difference between collateral damage to civilians from attacking military targets in war, and the intentional killing of peaceful demonstrators.

      There’s also a huge difference between the (admittedly shameful and illegal) treatment of prisoners at Gitmo and the blatant, unrestricted torture that the Iranians routinely practice in their prisons.

      So in short, if you don’t understand why the US and Iran aren’t seen the same way, you’re an idiot. Maybe you should take up residence in Tehran and see what happens when you criticize their govt. Sounds like a good learning experience for you.

      1. Ok, how many articles have appeared on Reason about SWAT teams invading homes and killing innocent people? Is that similar enough for you? Government killing it’s own citizens for no reason. While Iran might be worse on torture in terms of amount they are the same in kind. Torture is torture and any government that engages in it is just as guilty. So in short, if you don’t see why the US and Iran SHOULD be seen the same way, actually the US as worse, then you are an idiot. Iran just abuses it’s own people, the US abuses the whole world.

        “How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you don’t see the beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you’ll see clearly enough to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

        1. I’m still going with the idiot hypothesis. Not seeing any reason to doubt it yet.

          1. Ok, I’ll just go with the fact that you are a moron.

              1. We’re the same as you. No difference at all!
                Nyah nyah nyah!

              2. The very existence of this site sans-stormtroopers kicking in Balko’s office door proves we are not like Iran. Plus the whole separation of church and state. Also if anyone cannot see the difference between abuse of rights as an institution and abuse of power in the a socety that does not condone those acts well then we really can’t have a discussion can we?

                1. You’re right we aren’t like Iran, we are worse. Our stormtroopers kick in the doors of poor people living in foreign lands that have never done anything to us and kill 3 pregnant women, cut out the bullets and then try to cover it up by saying they were already dead when they got there. They also kill the men present who happen to be Afghani officials and our allies. But hey as long as they leave Reason alone it’s all good, right? Also how can you say this society doesn’t condone abuses of rights with the Arizona law, the beatings and killings by cops, the war on drugs, mandated healthcare, et., etc., etc..

                  1. You’re free to go live over there, if you love it so much. Maybe while you’re not joining in the stoning of women who’ve been raped, you can write a review of the country’s proud libertarian traditions.

                    1. Never said I love it, never said I agree with it. Just said the US is totally hypocritical condemning other countries human rights abuses since it is one of the worst offenders.

        2. The problem with that is the beam of human rights abuses is in someone else’s eye, not ours.

          1. If they have a beam the US has the whole tree.


  18. Why on Earth are Americans, unlike their enlightened comrades in Europe, so skeptical of the United Nations?

    Why on Earth is the United Nations skeptical of the U.S., which praises peace and wages war, denounces torture while torturing and, oh, yes, demands free trade while practicing protectionism. Granted, the UN is a bigger fraud than the US, but does it do more damage?

    1. And what if I am skeptical of all nation states and international organizations that recognize any nation-states? What do you make of someone like me?

      1. I’d say your life is doomed to be solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

        1. Based upon what evidence?

          1. Based upon what evidence?

            Evidence? In the eighth grade his government school civics instructor had him stand still as she drew a red circle around him and told him never to cross that line because everything on the other side is bad. What other evidence does he need?

        2. Time to come in. Your false flag op has been compromised.

        3. What is it that prompts assholes like this to come to a discussion forum and put this much effort into being a dick? If we are crazy fringe retards, why not ignore us?

          1. Agent MNG is a disturbed individual. We had him do what was intended to be low contact, low profile reconnaissance work to gather intelligence on your political niche. Since then he has snapped and become obsessed with you. Frankly, it could have been anyone.

      2. Anarchists refute their own arguments just by opening their mouths.

        1. So you say, slaver.

    2. The UN also does way less good in the world than the US does.

      1. I would have to agree with this. Anyone who has the slightest bit of respect for the UN should rent the film “Hotel Rwanda”. It is based upon a true story.

        1. No UN peacekeeping command can do any more than the member countries will let it do.

          In Rwanda the countries that could have made a difference, ie
          France and the US, refused to give General Dellaire either the means (he requested additional troops and armor) or the necessary changes in the rules of engagement to make any kind of meaningful intervention.

          1. That’s true. If it’s not one, it’s the other. Isaac Bartram raises a good point.

          2. Issac and Art, one of the big problems is that the Ultra-Politically-Correct United Nations were not allowed to load their guns with bullets. When the locals learned of this it was not long before they were either ignored or killed.

            1. Right, that is that “rules of engagement” thingy. They were absurdly limited because of what Isaac Bartram says above. I would have gone out and found me some ammo, but there are a lot of reasons why I am not a soldier.

              1. Are you saying the United States instituted these rules of engagement?

    3. I’m a little bit country.

      I’m a little bit rock ‘n’ roll.

  19. Rather them than the US or Israel.

  20. You don’t seem to realise that this is what makes the US look foolish to all. Again the UN (on American soil and hating all of you lets not kid ourselves) introduces to a human rights body another joke such as Iran or Libya and you all talk about it!
    How about kicking them out of your beautiful country and demanding that they pay their own way (maybe they can start bludging of China), bet that would make them think twice about this sort of crap!

    1. Keep your friends close.

      Keep your enemies closer.

  21. The United States seems to be powerless to do anything anymore. Pirates are making millions but are not dealt with when captured. Human rights are ignored in the U.N. We are silent on These crimes being commited, Yet seem to be in a continual disagreement on just about everything within our own borders. Someone better wake up or the USA as we know it will disappear from the earth.

    1. Wishful thinking.

      1. I’m sure everybody hated Rome as well.

  22. OK, after reading the comments.

    I guess I need to ask these questions:

    If the UN could not apply pressure to stop George Bush, then what good is it?

    If the US is an evil murdering country, why should the UN stay located in one of its major cities? Doesn’t that just give undue respect to the US?

    Clearly, by any standard, Iran and Libya do not belong on any rights councils, how does the US being an evil country change the fact that the UN now has them there?

    What does the UN do that has a meaningful real impact on the world?

  23. Israel should quit the UN. There is no reason for it to be there. It is just a punching bag for Moslem bullies. Ronald Reagan once suggested we quit: “If the UN wants to leave New York … well … goodbye! We’ll be down at the dock wishing it a fond farewell…”

  24. I’d be happy if the UN just moved from NYC to Mombassa or Mogadishu.

  25. The UN would be greatly improved by the addition of two simple words to its charter: “No dictators.” It’s simply ridiculous in these so-called modern times that a nation can allow all of its power to be vested in one man.

    Nobody’s saying that nations couldn’t have dictators, of course; they just wouldn’t be allowed in my proposed “new” UN. They’d also forfeit their membership in what could be called “polite society,” along with the occasional humanitarian aid that goes with it.

    A League of Democracies would be a great idea.

  26. UN = special rights for women. Human rights = special rights for women.

  27. Uh, UN? Gimme a break. What kind of ignoramuses write these articles? The UN has infiltrated every aspect of our lives with their evil global government dreams. Unless you want to sacrifice your sovereignty to world government totalitarianism and redistribution of the wealth you’d do well to reject this behemoth NGO gov’t wannabe.

  28. In democratic societies like the United States, the voting process is a means by which citizens hold their government accountable, conflicts are channeled into resolutions, and power transfers peacefully. Our system of representative government works only when honest ballots are not diluted by fraudulent ballots. When elections become corrupted, democracy becomes threatened.
    The FBI has a limited role in ensuring fair and free elections in the United States. Election crimes become federal cases when:
    The ballot includes one or more federal candidates;
    The crime involves an election official abusing his duties;
    The crime pertains to fraudulent voter registration;
    Voters are not U.S. citizens.
    First Name: kenyan born at the white house
    Last Name: TRUTH
    Address: AMERICA
    Address: INPEACH OBAMA
    City: USA
    State: usa THE END OF AMERICA
    NPR archive describes Obama as ‘Kenyan-born’
    Michelle say Barack born in Kenya
    Obama’s grandmother say he was born in Kenya
    Subject: OBAMA SAID approval ratings are still very high in the country of my birth.
    obama people have no idea of the extent to which they have to be gulled in order to be led.” “The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of the nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell a big one.” “All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those towards whom it is directed will understand it. Therefore, the intellectual level of the propaganda must be lower the larger the number of people who are to be influenced by it.” “Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise. “pelosi don’t see much future for the Americans … it’s a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social &^% …obama feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance … everything about the behaviour of American society reveals that it’s half &^%, and the other half &^& How can one expect a State like that to hold TOGTHER.They include the angry left wing bloggers who spread vicious lies and half-truths about their political adversaries… Those lies are then repeated by the duplicitous left wing media outlets who “discuss” the nonsense on air as if it has merit? The media’s justification is apparently “because it’s out there”, truth be damned. State: *usa Obama chuckles at America*

  29. We must get rid of the UN and use the building for middle income families. It is absurd to pay to support the UN while the UN is hostile to democracy and our way of life. Throw the bums out already, they are our enemies, let them return to the hellholes they came from.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.