Sure. That's a perfectly logical. I get that conservatives hate the UN. I will even agree that it's a fairly weak organization with limited utility, although not zero.
As for them hating us, countries aren't that different than people. Treat people with respect and dignity and most people will return the favor. Some will be jerks no matter what. You are free to treat other people however you want, but you can't treat them however you want without consequences, even if you're the biggest, strongest, richest on the block.
All we have done is tell them we're not bending over anymore, and we're not going to be sheep with their One-World Government schemes anymore. I hope Trump continues to be even more blunt with them as time goes on. If they don't like it, I hope he tells them to PISS-OFF!
The Russians back in the cold war days used to send out pairs of agents to county governments everywhere and copy public records on file. So somewhere, they have/had records on where you live, the public utilities in your hometown, property tax information and whatever. The FBI followed them, but since they weren't breaking any laws and because they had diplomatic immunity if they did, there was nothing to be done. That's the UN. I doubt the US did the same thing in the Soviet Union since there were fewer public records.
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
The parking problem could be resolved easily- - - - -impound illegally parked vehicles and sell them to cover any outstanding fine balances the particular embassy that's in control of the vehicle owes. Nope, the UN is in Noo Yawk, and doing something like that would take somebody with more balls than De Blasio could ever manage to scrape up!
Jerry
Might as well kick out the embassies too while we're at it. Lots of high value DC realestate being taken up. Plus we could save a bunch eliminating the entire state department! We've got all the diplomacy we'll ever need floating silently thousands of meters below the ocean surface and deep in silos around the country.
You know? Every once in awhile you come up with some damned good ideas......that would also take care of that "diplomatic immunity"nonsense....
Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
Might as well kick out the embassies too while we're at it. Lots of high value DC realestate being taken up. Plus we could save a bunch eliminating the entire state department! We've got all the diplomacy we'll ever need floating silently thousands of meters below the ocean surface and deep in silos around the country.
What the heck does that have to do with funding the UN? While not a half bad idea, It is like comparing apples and beachballs.
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
Might as well kick out the embassies too while we're at it. Lots of high value DC realestate being taken up. Plus we could save a bunch eliminating the entire state department! We've got all the diplomacy we'll ever need floating silently thousands of meters below the ocean surface and deep in silos around the country.
Now you're just being silly, having a little tantrum are we?
The parking problem could be resolved easily- - - - -impound illegally parked vehicles and sell them to cover any outstanding fine balances the particular embassy that's in control of the vehicle owes. Nope, the UN is in Noo Yawk, and doing something like that would take somebody with more balls than De Blasio could ever manage to scrape up!
Jerry
They've got diplomatic plates. Can't impound them. Which I understand as we have automobiles with diplomatic plates in other countries that most likely do the same thing. It's not a hill to die on.
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
They've got diplomatic plates. Can't impound them. Which I understand as we have automobiles with diplomatic plates in other countries that most likely do the same thing. It's not a hill to die on.
We're talking about kicking the UN out of the country....if we got to that point I don't think diplomatic plates would carry much weight....
Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
Sure. That's a perfectly logical. I get that conservatives hate the UN. I will even agree that it's a fairly weak organization with limited utility, although not zero.
It has limited utility as a worldwide disaster relief vehicle. But it is inefficient because we allow rogue governments to dole out the relief, thereby taking credit for it and staving off the revolutions that are needed to revive their countries.
Face it - the poor will always be with us, in spite of the best efforts that we are capable of. Masses of humanity have to die to fix what is wrong with the world. It's a terrible and heartless thing to say, but it has always been true. Evil leaders will starve millions to control the ones who are surviving. Mao did it, Stalin did it, N. Korea is still doing it, and most of the third world and beyond is perpetually doing it. The only ones who can be helped are the ones who have already started handling the problem, and if any are succeeding, it is because most of the starving masses are dead and gone. They will survive because they are managing their birth rates to consume no more than they can produce, rather than letting nature thin them out randomly.
As for them hating us, countries aren't that different than people. Treat people with respect and dignity and most people will return the favor. Some will be jerks no matter what. You are free to treat other people however you want, but you can't treat them however you want without consequences, even if you're the biggest, strongest, richest on the block.
That is marginally true in western societies, but wholly ridiculous in much of the rest of the world. Their leaders will use the masses to beg for western aid, but will then hoard it and dole it out to those who will do their bidding. Asians and Middle Easterners mostly believe that any other behavior is a sign of weakness and stupidity.
As for the UN being useful to preventing war, that is total hogwash. Treaty alliances between like-minded countries can often accomplish that, using carrot/stick methods or 'back channels,' but by the time the UN can agree on anything, a military situation has already changed ten times. The nations with veto power are always the nations involved in any major conflict, so they can merely veto anything that doesn't serve their interests, and they always do.
The UN is useful for one thing, and one thing only....bringing food and medical aid to poor countries. Other than that, about the biggest thing they've done is to promote socialism and the concept of one-world government throughout the world, with one exception being the U.S., and that was almost finalized by the socialist in chief Barack Hussein Obama.
The USA isn't the only country in the world with a "swamp" running the show. The entitled swamp critters are cut from the same bolt of cloth worldwide, sort of like the pigs in "Animal Farm"- - - - - -"Some animals are more equal than others"- - - - -but they all squeal the same high-pitched tune when they get their testicles removed!
Jerry
We don't. We make up ~25% of total global gdp and pay about 25% for the UN between their regular budget and peace keeping efforts. See exact numbers above.
So, because we are worth more, we should pay more?
Kind of like because I am better educated, work harder, make better decisions, so became more wealthy, I should share my wealth with the poor?
Where have we heard that before?
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
BTW the USA is ranked 12th when it comes to wealth of a nation. However we pay the most into it
Pres. Trump and Ms. Haley are spot on with this one. I didn't do the math, but even with this cut, I believe we still pay the most, especially when you count what hosting costs.
Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
You would be wrong. The premise to help others is there but it would require your usual spin to justify the percentage that the US pays to the UN. You claim to be an atheist to begin with and you actually try and use the Bible to back up your bs? You'll stoop to anything to keep an argument going.
We don't. We make up ~25% of total global gdp and pay about 25% for the UN between their regular budget and peace keeping efforts. See exact numbers above.
Yes we are funding an organization to the tune of 25% of it's budget and we have just about ZERO control over what it does with the money.
In the corporate world if you own 25% of the stock of a corporation you are most likely the controlling vote for just about ANYTHING that happens. But NO, we share equal footing with Nigeria, Syria, Iraq...
Total BS arrangement...
I find it funny that Alpha is all for democracy and doesn't see the huge gaping hole in his logic. Democracy is one man, one vote. UN is one vote per country. And since he is also a sorta kinda leaning towards collectivist kind of political thinking then it would follow that the UN members would pay an equal percentage of the budget. 193 nations should each pay 1/193 fraction of the budget. That right there would get the spending down to a correct level, or make the freeloaders pick up their 'stuff' and 'git'.
Wambli's analogy follows what I just wrote. If we're paying 25% then we should have the controlling vote on how that money is spent, as in a veto power on any and all spending, period.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
First of all I want to say, all Demonrats, I mean Dummy craps, Scuse meeee I mean Democrats, who dont want a tax cut should voluntarily give a $10,000 donation to the country to help fund social programs the tax cuts might take away from.
But cutting to the real meaning of the thread, It's about time somebody had the balls to call their bluff. The UN has been taking advantage of the people of this country since its inception after WWII. Things have evolved to the point the US gets to give the lion's share of the money and has the least stroke in the organization. The scumbags of the world are no different than the Democratic party in that they figure because the U.S. is a highly successful country we should foot it's bill. Well Screw 'em. This is why we elected Trump. Wake up people! This is what Trump's about and why the left hates him so bad, well that along with the fact that he beat their heroin Hillary, an act that seems they will never forgive us for.
(The rant continues) We are tired of funding everybodies party and being told to keep our mouth's shut and eat poo! We cannot afford to let the lefts rhetoric and BS, well their rhetoric is strictly BS, rule us and keep us quietly in the corner. This is the time to stand up and be counted and fight back. The path they will put us on will be our ruination. If we want to keep this great country great, we need to keep a lid on their marxist ideas and plots. The U.N. is a giant marxist dirt bed that can take this country down if we don't fight back. Nikky Hayley and Donald Trump are our future hope. We need to stand by them.
(Rant not over, just on hold.)
Daddy, what's an enabler?
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Pretty ironic for an atheist to bring that up. I think the bible also says something like "give a man a fish and he will eat for a day....teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is a statement from Karl Marx. The thing about Marxism is it replaces charity with laws, and we don't get from each his ability nor do we get to each his need. It's a flawed system.
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
Um. Veto power in the security council? Seems like a fairly large special privilege. Also we do get lots of other control. We just don't get total control. Just like a large minority shareholder does. 25% is less than 50% so like in the corporate world if you're a minority shareholder and the rest of the shareholders don't agree with what you want, you don't get it.
Many poor countries pay much less than their formulated dues and many countries are in arrears for substantial amounts of their dues and yet their voice and vote is the same as that of the US. I'm sure that you can research the reason that the UN was formed in 1945 and it wasn't for the US to dole out huge amounts of financial aid to countries that hate us but want to dictate our actions. President Trump's advisors convinced him not to pull the US out of the UN but the USA needs to determine how much we'll contribute to the UN and not have that percentage assigned to us. The UN should be hosted by a poor third world country so that their economy can be boosted as many liberals claim it does for the US.
Yeah. I know. Hence my statement that also isn't in the Bible. ;-)
My first instinct was to take your statement as fact.....THEN I realized you have a serious penchant for sarcasm, so I decided to google the quote. Thanks for the slap upside the head....:jester:
Many poor countries pay much less than their formulated dues and many countries are in arrears for substantial amounts of their dues and yet their voice and vote is the same as that of the US. I'm sure that you can research the reason that the UN was formed in 1945 and it wasn't for the US to dole out huge amounts of financial aid to countries that hate us but want to dictate our actions. President Trump's advisors convinced him not to pull the US out of the UN but the USA needs to determine how much we'll contribute to the UN and not have that percentage assigned to us. The UN should be hosted by a poor third world country so that their economy can be boosted as many liberals claim it does for the US.
Along with what he said, make voting contingent on not being in arrears on dues. Not paid up; no vote. Call it a poll tax! :roll2:
And the part about a third world country hosting the UN is right on the money. I think Somalia would be an ideal location.
“I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer” ― Douglas Adams
Replies
Then they would be out overnight, and not 90 days....LOL
All we have done is tell them we're not bending over anymore, and we're not going to be sheep with their One-World Government schemes anymore. I hope Trump continues to be even more blunt with them as time goes on. If they don't like it, I hope he tells them to PISS-OFF!
Jerry
You know? Every once in awhile you come up with some damned good ideas......that would also take care of that "diplomatic immunity"nonsense....
What the heck does that have to do with funding the UN? While not a half bad idea, It is like comparing apples and beachballs.
Now you're just being silly, having a little tantrum are we?
They've got diplomatic plates. Can't impound them. Which I understand as we have automobiles with diplomatic plates in other countries that most likely do the same thing. It's not a hill to die on.
We're talking about kicking the UN out of the country....if we got to that point I don't think diplomatic plates would carry much weight....
Not really talking about kicking out the UN. It has its place, but we shouldn't pay the bill for it on our own.
LOL!
Jerry
It has limited utility as a worldwide disaster relief vehicle. But it is inefficient because we allow rogue governments to dole out the relief, thereby taking credit for it and staving off the revolutions that are needed to revive their countries.
Face it - the poor will always be with us, in spite of the best efforts that we are capable of. Masses of humanity have to die to fix what is wrong with the world. It's a terrible and heartless thing to say, but it has always been true. Evil leaders will starve millions to control the ones who are surviving. Mao did it, Stalin did it, N. Korea is still doing it, and most of the third world and beyond is perpetually doing it. The only ones who can be helped are the ones who have already started handling the problem, and if any are succeeding, it is because most of the starving masses are dead and gone. They will survive because they are managing their birth rates to consume no more than they can produce, rather than letting nature thin them out randomly.
That is marginally true in western societies, but wholly ridiculous in much of the rest of the world. Their leaders will use the masses to beg for western aid, but will then hoard it and dole it out to those who will do their bidding. Asians and Middle Easterners mostly believe that any other behavior is a sign of weakness and stupidity.
As for the UN being useful to preventing war, that is total hogwash. Treaty alliances between like-minded countries can often accomplish that, using carrot/stick methods or 'back channels,' but by the time the UN can agree on anything, a military situation has already changed ten times. The nations with veto power are always the nations involved in any major conflict, so they can merely veto anything that doesn't serve their interests, and they always do.
Jerry
Now THAT brings back memories of the farm up the road from my childhood home at pig gelding time!
So, because we are worth more, we should pay more?
Kind of like because I am better educated, work harder, make better decisions, so became more wealthy, I should share my wealth with the poor?
Where have we heard that before?
Quotes?
You really went there?
Pres. Trump and Ms. Haley are spot on with this one. I didn't do the math, but even with this cut, I believe we still pay the most, especially when you count what hosting costs.
You would be wrong. The premise to help others is there but it would require your usual spin to justify the percentage that the US pays to the UN. You claim to be an atheist to begin with and you actually try and use the Bible to back up your bs? You'll stoop to anything to keep an argument going.
I find it funny that Alpha is all for democracy and doesn't see the huge gaping hole in his logic. Democracy is one man, one vote. UN is one vote per country. And since he is also a sorta kinda leaning towards collectivist kind of political thinking then it would follow that the UN members would pay an equal percentage of the budget. 193 nations should each pay 1/193 fraction of the budget. That right there would get the spending down to a correct level, or make the freeloaders pick up their 'stuff' and 'git'.
Wambli's analogy follows what I just wrote. If we're paying 25% then we should have the controlling vote on how that money is spent, as in a veto power on any and all spending, period.
― Douglas Adams
But cutting to the real meaning of the thread, It's about time somebody had the balls to call their bluff. The UN has been taking advantage of the people of this country since its inception after WWII. Things have evolved to the point the US gets to give the lion's share of the money and has the least stroke in the organization. The scumbags of the world are no different than the Democratic party in that they figure because the U.S. is a highly successful country we should foot it's bill. Well Screw 'em. This is why we elected Trump. Wake up people! This is what Trump's about and why the left hates him so bad, well that along with the fact that he beat their heroin Hillary, an act that seems they will never forgive us for.
(The rant continues) We are tired of funding everybodies party and being told to keep our mouth's shut and eat poo! We cannot afford to let the lefts rhetoric and BS, well their rhetoric is strictly BS, rule us and keep us quietly in the corner. This is the time to stand up and be counted and fight back. The path they will put us on will be our ruination. If we want to keep this great country great, we need to keep a lid on their marxist ideas and plots. The U.N. is a giant marxist dirt bed that can take this country down if we don't fight back. Nikky Hayley and Donald Trump are our future hope. We need to stand by them.
(Rant not over, just on hold.)
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Putting this in a Proper Context, I doubt it would be the Bible.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Pretty ironic for an atheist to bring that up. I think the bible also says something like "give a man a fish and he will eat for a day....teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime."
You had it right in the first two choices.....LOL
Ehhh, that was a mistake. The quote I made is actually a Chinese proverb, but is still applicable anyway.
Many poor countries pay much less than their formulated dues and many countries are in arrears for substantial amounts of their dues and yet their voice and vote is the same as that of the US. I'm sure that you can research the reason that the UN was formed in 1945 and it wasn't for the US to dole out huge amounts of financial aid to countries that hate us but want to dictate our actions. President Trump's advisors convinced him not to pull the US out of the UN but the USA needs to determine how much we'll contribute to the UN and not have that percentage assigned to us. The UN should be hosted by a poor third world country so that their economy can be boosted as many liberals claim it does for the US.
My first instinct was to take your statement as fact.....THEN I realized you have a serious penchant for sarcasm, so I decided to google the quote. Thanks for the slap upside the head....:jester:
Along with what he said, make voting contingent on not being in arrears on dues. Not paid up; no vote. Call it a poll tax! :roll2:
And the part about a third world country hosting the UN is right on the money. I think Somalia would be an ideal location.
― Douglas Adams