Posted Dec 12, 2007 by 
mlh in Politics | 46 comments | 584 views
It is a well established fact - verifiable fact - substantiated fact - that the United Nations, as an entity, as an organization, through the years, has become "united" against the United States, having given birth via the death of The League of Nations. The League of Nations was a dismal failure. The body tried to regulate any nation's right to defend itself by trying to regulate a nation thought to be a war-like nation. As noble as the verbiage of the League of Nations charter may have been, it is rather presumptuous to think possible that any nation would subject itself to a ruling body of sycophants could actually be unbiased in their individual or collective views.
To think that such an organization could stop wars from taking place reveals the arrogance of many. "How does such a group go about stopping wars from happening", is a question I have always asked while attending various history and government classes in my history of attending various colleges. The answers I received were indicative of a mind-set that cannot exist in the realms of reality. "Man can do better" was the average answer I received from theoretically highly educated educators. When I asked, "How", I received "deer in the headlights" glares.
President Woodrow Wilson of the United States conceived of the concept but the isolationists within the United States would not ratify America's membership. The primary reason for this is that we had just ended a very vicious war among "civilized" nations and the League of Nations would have to provide an Army to enforce the No War Rule. If a nation would not adhere to the No War Rule and went ahead and went to war with another nation, what good could a toothless body such as the League of Nations be?
Some would say that due to the presence of an attitude of "goodwill" within The League of Nations, it was a success. Sorry. Goodwill is toothless and meaningless. The concept was noble but impracticable and the minor successes it had became over shadowed by their impossibility to stop WWII. Some would say that the League was responsible for WWII. We may never know that for sure.
In 1946, the League was dissolved...enter the United Nations, another organization that has turned into a financial nightmare bereft of morals and dominated by fraud and conspiracies. The evident Double Standards of the organization are well known but widely ignored.
Not only is The United Nations as an organization united against The United States, it seems that friends of the United States, such as Canada, are also castigated and subjected to underhanded acts.
As noble as the League of Nations was, the same is so of The United Nations. The very first test for the United Nations was the conflict between North and South Korea and we all know how well that worked out, don't we? There is still a state of war between the North and South Koreans. No success there.
The evidence of UN fundings going to North Korea for their nuclear aspirations is "Rather" foreboding all in and of itself, is it not? Project # 12431 requires much investigation and this leads to why the United States should be the primary financier of an organization that flatly does more harm than good for the United States and other Western Nations.
The truest impact of the United Nations can be found at UN Watch among many other places. The biggest issues I have with the self-vaunted United Nations are their ethics - if you can call it that. I call their financial activities into question as well as their alleged humanitarian efforts.
As my friend at Atlas Shrugs states, "Out of the UN NOW!"
I vote that The United States evicts the UN from New York and relocate the quagmire to Brussels. I also call for the United States Government to stop funding an obviously anti-American organization and take our very own home-grown anti-Americanists with them.
Vote it up at Digital Journal
To think that such an organization could stop wars from taking place reveals the arrogance of many. "How does such a group go about stopping wars from happening", is a question I have always asked while attending various history and government classes in my history of attending various colleges. The answers I received were indicative of a mind-set that cannot exist in the realms of reality. "Man can do better" was the average answer I received from theoretically highly educated educators. When I asked, "How", I received "deer in the headlights" glares.
President Woodrow Wilson of the United States conceived of the concept but the isolationists within the United States would not ratify America's membership. The primary reason for this is that we had just ended a very vicious war among "civilized" nations and the League of Nations would have to provide an Army to enforce the No War Rule. If a nation would not adhere to the No War Rule and went ahead and went to war with another nation, what good could a toothless body such as the League of Nations be?
Some would say that due to the presence of an attitude of "goodwill" within The League of Nations, it was a success. Sorry. Goodwill is toothless and meaningless. The concept was noble but impracticable and the minor successes it had became over shadowed by their impossibility to stop WWII. Some would say that the League was responsible for WWII. We may never know that for sure.
In 1946, the League was dissolved...enter the United Nations, another organization that has turned into a financial nightmare bereft of morals and dominated by fraud and conspiracies. The evident Double Standards of the organization are well known but widely ignored.
Not only is The United Nations as an organization united against The United States, it seems that friends of the United States, such as Canada, are also castigated and subjected to underhanded acts.
As noble as the League of Nations was, the same is so of The United Nations. The very first test for the United Nations was the conflict between North and South Korea and we all know how well that worked out, don't we? There is still a state of war between the North and South Koreans. No success there.
The evidence of UN fundings going to North Korea for their nuclear aspirations is "Rather" foreboding all in and of itself, is it not? Project # 12431 requires much investigation and this leads to why the United States should be the primary financier of an organization that flatly does more harm than good for the United States and other Western Nations.
The truest impact of the United Nations can be found at UN Watch among many other places. The biggest issues I have with the self-vaunted United Nations are their ethics - if you can call it that. I call their financial activities into question as well as their alleged humanitarian efforts.
As my friend at Atlas Shrugs states, "Out of the UN NOW!"
I vote that The United States evicts the UN from New York and relocate the quagmire to Brussels. I also call for the United States Government to stop funding an obviously anti-American organization and take our very own home-grown anti-Americanists with them.
Vote it up at Digital Journal
|