Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Republicans trying to keep Clinton out of UN
BigBDrugStores:
--- Quote from: Bomb-A on February 04, 2005, 11:12:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: Woodrow on February 01, 2005, 04:13:15 PM ---Go for it.
I don't see why repubs are getting angry. If anything this would give us more weight in the UN.
--- End quote ---
the US shits on the UN....they dont need clinton to give them weight
peace
--- End quote ---
well bill is pretty heavy
Don Jacob:
--- Quote from: Rampant on February 01, 2005, 04:21:52 PM ---I thought bill clinton was a good president, and i dont see the harm in him doing this.
--- End quote ---
yeah i agree, the worst that could happen is it gets revealed he had his sausage slobbered on again...lol, let the dude do his political thang.
Matrix Heart:
--- Quote from: Don Rizzle on February 02, 2005, 10:02:12 AM ---The UN is not America! its an international organisation skin colour has nothing to do with it. even if the secretary general doesn't have much power (how much of that is true i don't know?) he has alot of influence. the bush administration has made anti american sentiment increase hugely since coming to power do you think those people will respect bill clinton or will they see america having more power over the UN than before. i've always spoken very highly of bill clinton but the role isn't suited to him IMO
--- End quote ---
Bill Clinton is loved by the World (France/Germany/China) what are you talking about?
Don Rizzle:
you don't seem to understand its about power and influence, america has huge power of the UN and is not afraid to use it, having bill clinton as the head of the UN would only increase that. This would undermine its capacity as an international organisation and would send it into further crisis, and is more than likely to cause further divide within the organisation, i don't believe the position should goto anyone from perminant security council member states (those who hold the vetos).
I disagree with american thinking on many issues which is why i believe an american running things would hinder global unity.
America is against the ICC
America is against Kyto and dealing with climate change
In the recent G7 meeting America was the obstical to boosting development aid, eradicating poverty and increasing the number of countries considered for debt relief.
America has controversial military procedures like the use of cluster bombs and landmines as well as the internationally condemned gauntamino bay.
its increasing evident thats its all on europe to solve the world's key problems like poverty and climate change. Having an American head the UN would send the wrong message and would probably make it harder to solve the key issues.
Matrix Heart:
--- Quote from: Don Rizzle on February 06, 2005, 08:33:51 AM ---you don't seem to understand its about power and influence, america has huge power of the UN and is not afraid to use it, having bill clinton as the head of the UN would only increase that. This would undermine its capacity as an international organisation and would send it into further crisis, and is more than likely to cause further divide within the organisation, i don't believe the position should goto anyone from perminant security council member states (those who hold the vetos).
--- End quote ---
America has 1 vote just like every country in the security council.
(If they don't like the vote count they'll use Sept 11th license to invade the world.)
Like some1 said above Bill Clinton does not represent W Bush's America.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version