The UN HQ

General chitchat, advertisements for other services, and other non-Cantr-related topics

Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department

ShouldUN Headquarter be moved from the USA?

No, it is fine where it is
5
25%
Yes, let's put it enywhere else but not on USA ground
15
75%
 
Total votes: 20
User avatar
The Hunter
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 12:59 pm
Location: In my cave, making bombs.
Contact:

Postby The Hunter » Fri Mar 19, 2004 8:20 pm

Actually, Berserk is right... The US were quite fond of dear Saddam. Even when he turned Psycho. Afterall, he fought those scary Iranians. Him massacring his own people didn't matter, afterall he served a purpose.

And the bombings in Iraq probably won't turn the people against those "terrorists". A feew weeks ago 3 boms exploded during a Shiite festival, killing many. The Shiits, although a majority in Iraq were surpressed and thus should be happy with the US intervention. But when US soldiers arrived on the scene, they were attacked and chased away by the angry mob.

Anyone still thinking the Iraqi population will turn against the bombers? Remem,ber, Americans aren't too popular in that region. Even though they'd do everything right there, they'd never even win a little trust and are merely tolerated for the time being.
Life is fun. Play naked with Psycho-Pixie.

"Our enemies are resourceful and innovative".
"and so are we..."
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and people"
"and neither do we"
~G.W Bush
User avatar
nitefyre
Posts: 3528
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:29 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

Postby nitefyre » Fri Mar 19, 2004 8:44 pm

berserk9779 wrote:I didn't say that saddams isn't a monster ....


Liar, yes you DID!

berserk9779 wrote:And, Why do you keep saying that saddams is a bad guy? ...


Bersrk>

-So instead of saying America should take responsibility for it, why don't you take responsibility for your own words! Hypocrit. The U.S. Foreign policy is at times at flaw, what we did today is not matching what we did in the past. It was something called the COLD war, which your location's peru (lesser), Italy and Britain had soemthing major to do with, in accordance to those against the oppression of the Warsaw Group to the east. That tainted the US foriegn policy to favoring Israel over Arabs, today of course, we think differently. =\ Learn your facts.

Hunter>


The Hunter wrote: Actually, Berserk is right... The US were quite fond of dear Saddam. Even when he turned Psycho. Afterall, he fought those scary Iranians. Him massacring his own people didn't matter, afterall he served a purpose.


Barely helpign the lesser of two evils has always been US Foriegn policy, as I recall, ever since WWII when the US/Britain couldn't decide between China or Japan before Pearl Harbour. Indecision, something we're all good at. At least we take a stand on a situation, more than most wannabe European countries do, just trying to be different so they aren't targets of the World, but yet the US gives many of these Countries (turkey) foriegn aide.

And yer statement about "The US were quite fond of dear Saddam. Even when he turned Psycho" is completely false. The US doesn't ever support fanaticalism (Iran Fundamentalists) and was turned against them thanks to their students hostage holding hundreds of American citizens in the failed Tehran operation. Ever heard of Operation Desert Storm? The US by then had [1991] turned against Saddam Hussein, and now viewed him as a threat after he had tried to spread his borders. Unfortunately, what I do see the US in failing in-was not supporting regime change as the SHiite before the Kurd Population had failed in. This is whats putting the US in Iraqi eyes as not trustworthy, because we just stood by as they failed. WIth just some support, we wouldn't've had an entire military op which puts weary american boots on the ground, people who don't wannabe with the Iraqis either. SO it goes true for both sides. ANd anyways, the US need not have helped with the rescue, now that a suitable Fire/Police presence has been set up in the absense of Saddams lil minions.
User avatar
berserk9779
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Argentina

Postby berserk9779 » Fri Mar 19, 2004 9:22 pm

NiTeFyRe wrote:
berserk9779 wrote:I didn't say that saddams isn't a monster ....


Liar, yes you DID!

berserk9779 wrote:And, Why do you keep saying that saddams is a bad guy? ...


Bersrk>

-So instead of saying America should take responsibility for it, why don't you take responsibility for your own words! Hypocrit. .


Wrong. I am not an hypocrit. I asked you "Why do you keep saying that saddams is a bad guy?" meaning that you being american are almost as guilty as him for giving him the power (indirectly) of killing so much people.

If you give a shotgun to a child and he shots someone dead you are probably more guilty than the child. Giving a country with huge natural resources and unstable politics in the hands of a megalomaniac is much worse, and you see the resoults for that silly action marked on the mass graves of the kurds.

Can I also point you out that is fucking dumb to keep saying "the governement then" or " the president at the time". The fact that a certain president is no more in charge does not make disappear all the misdeeds that he's done in the name of american people. A president is elected from the people, so the people have to take responsability for his actions.
rklenseth
Posts: 4736
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 12:46 am

Postby rklenseth » Fri Mar 19, 2004 9:28 pm

And we do by voting him or maybe someday her out of office. Or if it is really bad, removing said person from office. Also, the way Americans thought during those times were different than perhaps what we think now. We are only human and make mistakes but I think we have taken responsibility for our mistakes. For instance, I believe you said that we created the monster that was Saddam and well we took him out.
User avatar
Pirog
Posts: 2046
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 8:36 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Postby Pirog » Fri Mar 19, 2004 9:35 pm

Badger>

Do you really think you have learned any lessons?
Look into the people the American have pushed as future leaders in Afghanistan and Iraq...it aint nice people.
User avatar
nitefyre
Posts: 3528
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:29 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

Postby nitefyre » Fri Mar 19, 2004 9:37 pm

Badger (rklenseth) wrote:And we do by voting him or maybe someday her out of office. Or if it is really bad, removing said person from office. Also, the way Americans thought during those times were different than perhaps what we think now. We are only human and make mistakes but I think we have taken responsibility for our mistakes. For instance, I believe you said that we created the monster that was Saddam and well we took him out.


PErfect example =D Same with Afghanistan (tho it were the Russians who fracked that soo far up).

Anyways, the reason you are being hypocritical because you asked the US to take responsibility for their actions, which RKL answered to.

And then you went so far as to say as I QUOTED you state in a firm question voice why America believes Saddam is Bad? That directly is contradicting your other phrased as question, who doesn't think Saddam is an evil monster. If your so far as ignorant enough as to contradict yourself, maybe that is the problem, not the hypocracy...

Maybe had you taken course in the 20.20 hind sight, any idiot could do better. But as I was saying before, the lesser of 2 evils.

Something I must also state, is something called Individualism, that calls for I am not America, and so what one president choses to do, is what he does. We run a republic democracy, which in not all of us agree wit our leaders choices. So dont put me on the boat of every single idiot president we've had.
User avatar
berserk9779
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 9:11 pm
Location: Argentina

Postby berserk9779 » Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:20 pm

Again. I did not ask why america believe that saddam is a bad guy, I asked him why he kept saying it, not having any right to do so.
David
Posts: 696
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:50 am
Location: Maryland/America

Postby David » Sun May 16, 2004 4:52 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I can't wait until this era ends and all the atrocities committed will be chalked up to "the war on terror". Just as now all the atrocities committed in the world by the powers that be are chalked up to "the cold war". The same things that were denied during the cold war from even happening, when the accusations and proof were all over the place, now "coming clean" but still indignantly justifying what previously would not have been justifiable to the public.

To be "fair and balanced", Saddam was proped up by America, France, Germany, and even Russia at some points. All equally unjustifiable. People think these ideas are their own, but they are introduced through imperialist think-tanks who basically spend all there working hours figuring out ways to construct a populist ideology that will be acceptable to the majority for imperialist tactics.

You can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. - Bob Marley

By the way, New York isn't "Modern Rome". The only way that would be even halfway possible analogy is if Washington, D.C. and New York were the same city.

You really can't compare the two, because with modern technology it isn't neccesary for their to be some great central city for trade, industry and culture. With the rise of various foriegn modernities New York is only going to reduce in importance relative to the rest of the world cities. I think a more appropriate analogy might be that there are at lease two socio-political "places" the city and the country. "Rome" is all of the worlds cosmopolitan cities which are connected through technology, liberal sensibilities, and a cosmopolitan sense. In other words, San Fran, New York, Paris, London etc... have more in common with each other than they do with the outlying hinterland of their native surroundings.

In other words German and Japanese companies, headquartered in Cosmopolitan cities such as Tokyo have their factories in places like Rural South Carolina, as many American companies have their headquarters in New York and Washington, while their factories are spread around the globe in the rural hinterland. There is the cosmopolitan and the provincial hinterfolk. The worldly Washington cosmopolitan has more in common with a fellow cosmopolitan in Paris than a fellow American citizen in West Virginia.
User avatar
Pirog
Posts: 2046
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 8:36 am
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Postby Pirog » Sun May 16, 2004 5:33 pm

Oooh...a revived political discussion.
I better make sure I have plenty of ammo ;)
Eat the invisible food, Industrialist...it's delicious!
User avatar
The Hunter
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 12:59 pm
Location: In my cave, making bombs.
Contact:

Postby The Hunter » Sun May 16, 2004 5:51 pm

Yeah. Noiw I can reply to this.

NyTeFyRe wrote:Hunter>


the Hunter wrote:Actually, Berserk is right... The US were quite fond of dear Saddam. Even when he turned Psycho. Afterall, he fought those scary Iranians. Him massacring his own people didn't matter, afterall he served a purpose

Barely helpign the lesser of two evils has always been US Foriegn policy


Helping the lesser of 2 evils is still helping evil, those who help evil are? :?
Life is fun. Play naked with Psycho-Pixie.



"Our enemies are resourceful and innovative".

"and so are we..."

They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and people"

"and neither do we"

~G.W Bush
User avatar
1959 Apache
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 2:37 am
Location: Milford Pennsylvania USA

Postby 1959 Apache » Sun May 16, 2004 6:36 pm

And now for something completely different.............a post on topic.

Take the UN HQ and put it anywhere else, New York City is no place for a major gathering of diplomats. We have enough idiots in the city, we don't need the diplomats thumbing their noses at any and all laws. The streets are littered with cars illegally parked for days on end, with diplomatic licenses. Notice I didn't say foreign diplomats. The US dips are just as bad.

Securitywise, NYC is overloaded as it is. Anytime there is a special gathering at the UN, (and there are quite a few), whole sections of the city are 'frozen'. The police close off large areas so that the dips can have easy access to the building, while the rest of the city chokes on itself.

Move the UN, and while I'm at it, do not grant the Olympics to NYC. That will be nothing but a logistical boondoggle.
If you drive an old Chevy, you're all right by me!

Return to “Non-Cantr-Related Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest