UN to Deploy peacekeepers to Darfur

[Cypress]

Hmmm, let's try for a moment to remove the blinders. The US was not going unilaterally into Darfur, that was never going to happen. The UN was the organization that would have to, but they were stonewalling by issuing lots of conferences, condemnations, and studies. Then of course there were the issues of Oil for Food and sex scandals with the UN, much like the problems confronting the US with being stretched too thin because of Iraq and Afghanistan.

The fact that other nations, especially those that keep ballyhooing about human rights, have not been applying the pressure that Bolton was, truly was shameful.

Please. Bushites and NeoCons mocked the UN for years. They belittled them. They were hostile towards them.

Its laughable to suggest that "if only the UN would have listened to Bolton, this could have been addressed years ago"

Bolton was a walking, talking joke at the UN. His record of public statements against the UN were well known. Is that really the kind of diplomat one sends to the UN, if in fact, one wants to accomplish anything diplomatically?

Bolton may have had good rhetoric on Sudan. What does that matter? I'm sure the Chinese government issued nice-sounding public statements deploring the violence in Sudan.

Rhetoric is nothing, unless backed up by committment, credibility, and skill.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Well that contradicts what was said in the other quote I just highlighted.

One addresses the UN, one is an interview where he flubbered along.

The following is just my OPINION... I think in the interview he was trying to avoid putting pressure on the UN to act. I think he was trying to be as diplomatic as he could... and it came out all muddled. Just my opinion.

But I could really care less about Bolton. Cypress claims the Secretary General is but one man at the UN and now he is jumping on the bolton bashing bandwagon. Bottom line... the UN failed, Annan failed, Bolton failed and Bush failed. Each in different ways.

Ki-Moon has it going in the right direction. Attribute it to a him, to a change of heart from China, a magic baby fairy... I do not care... the right thing is being done. That is what matters.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Please.
Rhetoric is nothing, unless backed up by committment, credibility, and skill.

WHICH is WHY the UN has been ridiculed.

 

[Cancel7]

One addresses the UN, one is an interview where he flubbered along.

The following is just my OPINION... I think in the interview he was trying to avoid putting pressure on the UN to act. I think he was trying to be as diplomatic as he could... and it came out all muddled. Just my opinion.

But I could really care less about Bolton. Cypress claims the Secretary General is but one man at the UN and now he is jumping on the bolton bashing bandwagon. Bottom line... the UN failed, Annan failed, Bolton failed and Bush failed. Each in different ways.

Ki-Moon has it going in the right direction. Attribute it to a him, to a change of heart from China, a magic baby fairy... I do not care... the right thing is being done. That is what matters.

I agree that the failure lies on all of their parts. But I bet that Cypress agrees on that too.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I agree that the failure lies on all of their parts. But I bet that Cypress agrees on that too.

I would hope so.

 

[Annie]

Please. Bushites and NeoCons mocked the UN for years. They belittled them. They were hostile towards them.

Its laughable to suggest that "if only the UN would have listened to Bolton, this could have been addressed years ago"

Bolton was a walking, talking joke at the UN. His record of public statements against the UN were well known. Is that really the kind of diplomat one sends to the UN, if in fact, one wants to accomplish anything diplomatically?

Bolton may have had good rhetoric on Sudan. What does that matter? I'm sure the Chinese government issued nice-sounding public statements deploring the violence in Sudan.

Rhetoric is nothing, unless backed up by committment, credibility, and skill.

Well thanks for the unintended by the writer inferences. So, if the 'neo cons' say whatever, that makes the criticism wrong? You hold the same standards for those trying to blame a bridge falling in MN on the WOT? They should be ignored?

And what does what China says have to do with what the UN does or doesn't do? Perhaps if you are saying that if the US doesn't wish to act alone, they shouldn't voice an opinion?

 

[Cypress]

One addresses the UN, one is an interview where he flubbered along.

The following is just my OPINION... I think in the interview he was trying to avoid putting pressure on the UN to act. I think he was trying to be as diplomatic as he could... and it came out all muddled. Just my opinion.

But I could really care less about Bolton. Cypress claims the Secretary General is but one man at the UN and now he is jumping on the bolton bashing bandwagon. Bottom line... the UN failed, Annan failed, Bolton failed and Bush failed. Each in different ways.

Ki-Moon has it going in the right direction. Attribute it to a him, to a change of heart from China, a magic baby fairy... I do not care... the right thing is being done. That is what matters.

there's plenty of blame to go around.

Here's my point: If BushCo. and their fans are ideologically hostile to the concept of the UN, they are not likely to be committed to using it effectively.

Its the same reason Cons fail at governance in this country: They hate government. They have no interest in seeing it succeed. That's why morons like Heck of a Job Brownie, and Bolton get appointed to their jobs.

 

[Cypress]

Well thanks for the unintended by the writer inferences. So, if the 'neo cons' say whatever, that makes the criticism wrong? You hold the same standards for those trying to blame a bridge falling in MN on the WOT? They should be ignored?

And what does what China says have to do with what the UN does or doesn't do? Perhaps if you are saying that if the US doesn't wish to act alone, they shouldn't voice an opinion?

I could care less about "voicing an opinion".

I care about effective, comptent and committed american leadership.

The Bush admin is a laughing stock. They've blown a lot of america's credibility and leadership in the world. They spent the first four years of their admin mocking allies, and the UN ("Old europe", do I need to remind you?)

If you appoint anti-UN morons like Bolton to america's top job at the UN, spend years being hostile to the UN, and unilaterally invade a sovereign nation against the will of the world, you are going to lose credibility and effectiveness on the world stage.

That's not to say the UN is perfect, nor that there aren'y other obstructionists in the security council. But, the way to address that is to put effective american diplomats in place, and be committed. We can't change the chinese goverment, but we can change the type of people, and the type of adminstration we choose to work competently on those issues.

 

[Annie]

I could care less about "voicing an opinion".

I care about effective, comptent and committed american leadership.

The Bush admin is a laughing stock. They've blown a lot of america's credibility and leadership in the world. They spent the first four years of their admin mocking allies, and the UN ("Old europe", do I need to remind you?)

If you appoint anti-UN morons like Bolton to america's top job at the UN, spend years being hostile to the UN, and unilaterally invade a sovereign nation against the will of the world, you are going to lose credibility and effectiveness on the world stage.

That's not to say the UN is perfect, nor that there aren'y other obstructionists in the security council. But, the way to address that is to put effective american diplomats in place, and be committed. We can't change the chinese goverment, but we can change the type of people, and the type of adminstration we choose to work competently on those issues.

I'm not arguing this in a partisan way, nor in a way of US v. UN. Bottom line, regardless of what the rest of the world thinks of Bush, Bolton, or hot dogs, it was the US that kept hammering about confronting what they called genocide. As someone, perhaps you, said, Ki Moon is finally acting which is a good thing.