Re: DS - June 07, 2006
- From: Dann <detox665@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 13 Jun 2006 02:18:29 GMT
Rather than follow the advice of Henry Jones Sr., J.D. Baldwin couldn't
just let news:e6k1iv$8v6$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 12 Jun 2006 go.
In the previous article, Dann <detox665@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You are missing the point. The point is not that such things happen
as a result of UN policy. The point is that there are those that
view UN approval as a sort of diplomatic seal of quality. MF is
trying to point out that the UN is not a trustworthy organization.
I am *always* up for a round of UN-bashing. I have lots and lots of
bad things to say about that corrupt, venal, hypocritical organization
... but the Duck is off base on this one. He has simultaneously
managed to discredit himself and his argument with a really weak straw
man, and to trivialize a very serious issue.
UN peacekeeping operations are one of the things the UN tends to do
*right*. There are a few reasons (at least, in my theory of how it
works) why this should be so: First off, they have to get a pretty
solid consensus among the major western powers, who tend to be the
ones providing the actual troops, that such action is necessary, or
it just won't happen. Second, the command structure is military in
nature, and not micro-managed by the UN -- not because the UN is run
by smart guys who know better than to try to do that, but simply
because the countries providing the forces won't stand for it. And
some other reasons, but that's the thrust of it.
I'll keep your comments in mind. Perhaps I'll see things differently in
So, in the case of Liberia, yeah, it might have been worth it. I hope
the sons-of-bitches who raped those eight-year-olds (if it happened)
hang for it.
Apparently charges have been forwarded to their respective national
But I also recognize that there would be more than a few
eight-year-olds and others lying in the streets with their throats cut
if the UN hadn't intervened there. It's kind of hard to imagine how
someone could believe that the larger, long-term good of the people of
Iraq justifies the thousands of innocents who have been killed and
dismembered there, but doesn't see how the prevention of a bloody
civil war might still outweigh the sexual abuse of a relatively few
I don't see where anyone has every offered an either/or proposition on
At the least, Mr. Tinsley has pointed out the different standards used
when reporting such things as well as the different standards used by
America's critics when it comes to responding to the worst aspects of war
wherever they occur. In the case of the UN, there appears to be a
modicum of trust and an ability to pursue charges against the few
miscreants while maintaining support for the larger mission.
Blogging at: http://www.modempool.com/nucleardann/blogspace/blog.htm
Daddy, what does FORMATTING DRIVE C mean?
- Prev by Date: Re: Luann (6-9)
- Next by Date: Re: BC June 6, 2006- Twice as Wrong as Usual
- Previous by thread: Re: DS - June 07, 2006
- Next by thread: Re: DS - June 07, 2006