AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-10-03, 22:45   Link #24041
Ithekro
Space Battleship
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
The United Nation's problem in the field is that it was not suppose to be an army. The worlds countries is not ready to turn over the right to defend themselves or had over sovereignty over to a higher political body. The US had fought tooth and nail to prevent the UN from being the final say in what one can and cannot do within US borders.

Post Cold War, the UN Peacekeepers have no teeth. When they want teeth they call in support and favors from counties that have some military strength. Usually not the US unless it is an outright war zone and they need some massive carrier support (more than the French or British could provide by the 1990s).
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 05:09   Link #24042
sa547
Senior Member
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philippines
Age: 37
For all of its idealism, UN is sadly toothless as far as dealing with the worst brutes; said brutes went ahead and killed thousands, if not, millions of innocents in their wake; in most cases they have to call in the US or major Western powers to deal with the mess, even if it could be a costly cleanup.

Also China and Russia have permanent seats in the Security Council, so they could strike down any resolution attempting to condemn their "business partners".
__________________
sa547 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 06:31   Link #24043
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
People have to remember that the United Nations is essentially two things, holding up two often conflicting concepts. One, it is an assembly of nations, and therefore it is only as good as the collective whole of its members, or perhaps I should say the collective whole of the security council members with veto powers. It is not sovereign, possesses no military force of its own, and derives its mandate directly from the assent of member states.

From that perspective, it's working as intended so long as World War Three doesn't explode on us. It also means dirty dealings happen and bad, bad things get ignored as internal matters. This side of the UN holds supreme the idea of sovereignty.

The other side of the United Nations is as the world's most prominent symbol of the young ideology of "human rights." Its various institutions serve humanitarian roles, the world's biggest "NGO's." There are many people at the UN and inside its various institutions, and people across the world, who believe strongly in the ideal embodied in this side of the United Nations. Many of us take human rights for granted now, I myself hold human rights above every other values, but the evolution and expansion of the human rights concept is deeply intertwined with the existence of the UN. And this ideal is perhaps the bloodied twentieth century's greatest gift to our species, alongside sheer scientific progress.

From this perspective, however, while it achieved much in the name of humanity, it doesn't seem to be doing nearly all that it should. The evolution the UN "peacekeeping" role is an awkward compromise between the idealistic mandate and the actual power that lies with member nation-states in the assembly (especially the security council), members who, naturally, put their self-interest first. This is a pretty new thing, evolving through a reinterpretation of the original mandate, and it has to navigate narrow channels between sovereignty and idealism. So dramatic failures occur, the UN often can't take sides, peacekeepers have their hands tied and cannot fight to defend victims of genocides, the sort of failures which cost dearly in human lives and suffering, and which tarnish the UN "brand" for decades.

People who believe in the humanitarian ideal naturally expects much more to be done in the United Nations' name ("What are all the peacekeepers for? Why were they standing aside to watch genocides happen in Bosnia/Rwanda?"), but we do not have a one world government, and when sovereignty comes into conflict with human rights, or even when sovereignty conflicts with each other, or indeed when member states lack the will to act on mandates, the UN is rendered largely powerless.

The solution, I suppose, is to surrender some aspects of sovereignty to the UN organization itself, or implement UNATCO. But that's, ah, ominous, a double-edged sword if there ever was one...

_____________

On the news article itself, IMO the Philippines is only trying to expand the scope of the already-in-use tactic of internationalizing the Asian maritime disputes. The more concerned parties, the harder it is for one party to assert itself through force. It's using the UN brand to further his nation's self-interest, and, fairly enough, a success also means the strengthening of the UN brand and international consensus based on it.

A deadlock failure costs the UN little (no one expects anything to happen anyway with PRC having veto powers), and a catastrophe (PRC rejects the United Nations outright and withdraws) is unlikely.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 07:33   Link #24044
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 25
Personally, I think the UN as it is constituted right now is correct. I don't think it should have more powers, nor should it be a "world government", that's not it's role. As Irenicus said, it's an assembly of sovereign states, a means for them to meet in one place and resolve the issues facing the world.

If the UN has failures, I would not blame the UN itself, but the collective nations that make up it. It was built to defuse tensions and prevent WW3, and in that respect it has done a very good job.

As for Human Rights, it is only a mission of the UN because many members of the UN see it as important. This aspect is secondary to it's central role. If we want to see the UN do more about Human rights, then we have to elect governments who will take Human Rights more seriously. But ultimately, if the greater number of nations do not wish to respect Human Rights, the UN can't really do anything about it.

Also, the cause of peace ultimately will trump the cause of Human Rights. China might have atrocious human rights abuses, but the only way the UN could do anything about it would be to fight WW3. If atrocities were to occur in a smaller state, you would hope that the UN would step in, but often enough the states of the UN are not willing to form a united front. For instance, China is not willing to let a war be fought to halt Burma's human rights abuses, because it views that state as being within it's sphere of influence. By using it's veto to halt action there, it basically says that it's willing to fight WW3 to defend Burma. But at least by having that provision, there's very little opportunity for confusion. You can't get the US declaring war on Burma accidentally thinking that China won't care about it.

That's why it's very serious when states attack other states without a UN mandate. It brings the world much closer to war. When the USA invaded Iraq against the wishes of the security council it was gambling that the other members of that body who opposed it (namely France, Germany and China), would not step in to defend it. It was playing chicken with the other Powers of the world, and so risked WW3. While I doubt China, Germany or France were willing to fight a war over Iraq, it basically lowered the legitimacy of the UN, and meant that the next time China wanted to fight a war, it might choose to simply ignore the UN as a toothless agency, thus risking WW3 through China (or another country) thinking that other countries won't try to stop them if they go to war.

The only way you can have a "safe" war is for all the world powers to consent to it. That's why the UN is so important. It creates a legal framework for this consent to be secured.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 14:40   Link #24045
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Turkey steps up Syria strikes, says will defend borders
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...88J0X720121004
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 14:58   Link #24046
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
Personally, I think the UN as it is constituted right now is correct. I don't think it should have more powers, nor should it be a "world government", that's not it's role. As Irenicus said, it's an assembly of sovereign states, a means for them to meet in one place and resolve the issues facing the world.
you can do the same but cheaper by issuing Facebook accounts to each nation.


Quote:
Also, the cause of peace ultimately will trump the cause of Human Rights. China might have atrocious human rights abuses, but the only way the UN could do anything about it would be to fight WW3. If atrocities were to occur in a smaller state, you would hope that the UN would step in, but often enough the states of the UN are not willing to form a united front. For instance, China is not willing to let a war be fought to halt Burma's human rights abuses, because it views that state as being within it's sphere of influence. By using it's veto to halt action there, it basically says that it's willing to fight WW3 to defend Burma. But at least by having that provision, there's very little opportunity for confusion. You can't get the US declaring war on Burma accidentally thinking that China won't care about it.
it wasn't Russia or China that demand the Dutch be issue guns without bullets when European peacekeeper were sent to Bosnia.

Quote:
ignore the UN as a toothless agency,
it is a toothless agency,

the UN's power basically depends on how much the US is willing to back it.
__________________
Xellos-_^ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 15:18   Link #24047
AnimeFan188
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Report: Iran's fear of Israeli strike in 2008 led to series of air defense mishaps:

"According to the New York Times, a classified Pentagon report reveals that Iran's
military mistakenly fired on civilian planes, as well as its own aircraft, numerous
times in 2007 and 2008."

See:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...shaps-1.468045
AnimeFan188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 15:33   Link #24048
AnimeFan188
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Japanís New Tech Generation:

"As Japanís aging tech giants like Sony and Panasonic continue to falter, a new
generation of Japanese technology entrepreneurs is stepping up. While their
numbers are small compared to those in the United States, they are turning to a
bevy of start-up incubators and even to financing from Silicon Valley. And so-called
start-up dating salons, like the bar in central Tokyo, are helping to match would-
be collaborators.

ďThereís a lot of uncertainty in Japan right now, and thatís actually made younger
Japanese more willing to take risks and try out new ideas,Ē said Hiro Maeda, 26."

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/04/te...html?ref=world
AnimeFan188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 15:55   Link #24049
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnimeFan188 View Post
Report: Iran's fear of Israeli strike in 2008 led to series of air defense mishaps:

"According to the New York Times, a classified Pentagon report reveals that Iran's
military mistakenly fired on civilian planes, as well as its own aircraft, numerous
times in 2007 and 2008."

See:

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...shaps-1.468045
wait...
fired on a civilian aircraft, or actually shot it down ?
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 15:59   Link #24050
Ithekro
Space Battleship
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
I don't recall any incidents from that year of any planes being shot down.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 16:04   Link #24051
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
I don't recall any incidents from that year of any planes being shot down.
the TOR-M1 AA system mentioned is suppose to be fairly good.
and a civilian aircraft is a large slow target with zero electronic warfare capabilities.

hard to believe it would just miss.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 16:24   Link #24052
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
I don't recall any incidents from that year of any planes being shot down.
They could had covered it up.
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 16:26   Link #24053
Xellos-_^
Married
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by ganbaru View Post
They could had covered it up.
the article said shooting at not shot down.

i doubt the US would help iran with a cover up.
__________________
Xellos-_^ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 16:32   Link #24054
Ithekro
Space Battleship
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
If they did, it was not an airliner from a western country. Could be smaller aircraft or cargo planes. Those almost never hit the news.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 16:41   Link #24055
Sumeragi
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dai Korai Teikoku
There were firings, and two cases of drones being shot down (due to there being no real communication between the military and the Guards).
Sumeragi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 16:42   Link #24056
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumeragi View Post
There were firings, and two cases of drones being shot down (due to there being no real communication between the military and the Guards).
yeah, but the article mentioned a civilian aircraft specifically.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 18:41   Link #24057
RRW
Unspecified
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Unspecified
Blue and green honey makes French beekeepers see red

Quote:
(Reuters) - Bees at a cluster of apiaries in northeastern France have been producing honey in mysterious shades of blue and green, alarming their keepers who now believe residue from containers of M&M's candy processed at a nearby biogas plant is the cause.

Since August, beekeepers around the town of Ribeauville in the region of Alsace have seen bees returning to their hives carrying unidentified colorful substances that have turned their honey unnatural shades.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8930MQ20121004
__________________
RRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 18:43   Link #24058
Ithekro
Space Battleship
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 36
Maybe they can market that, if it is non-toxic.
__________________
Dessler Soto, Banzai!
Ithekro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 18:45   Link #24059
risingstar3110
Dead Master ★ BRS
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
Maybe they can market that, if it is non-toxic.
As a new M&M or a new honey brand...?
__________________
risingstar3110 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-10-04, 19:14   Link #24060
ganbaru
books-eater youkai
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
Russia dismisses talk of new spy scandal with U.S.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...89318C20121004
Those were probably more discret and usefull than the last bunch...
__________________

ganbaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 21:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.