Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 10/11/2004 5:30:19 PM EST
www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=126&art_id=qw1097486820272B226

Annan: UN must prevent pre-emptive strikes

October 11 2004 at 01:07PM

Beijing - The United Nations must show it is tough enough to ensure the security of its members so that individual countries do not take measures into their own hands, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said on Monday.

Speaking to Chinese university students in Beijing, Annan said fighting terrorism was best achieved through cooperation and information-sharing between states, not the use of force.

"Indeed, the first purpose of the United Nations, laid down in Article 1 of the Charter, is 'to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace'," Annan said.

"We must show that the United Nations is capable of fulfilling that purpose, so that states do not feel obliged or entitled to take the law into their own hands."

US President George W Bush questioned the relevance of the United Nations before the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, saying Baghdad had flaunted UN authority for a decade.

The United States and Britain withdrew a draft resolution on an invasion in the council in mid-March after it was clear there were not enough votes. France had threatened to veto if UN inspectors were not given more time to account for Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction.

In remarks at Beijing's Tsinghua University, Annan stopped short of repeating comments from an interview in September in which he said the 15-member Security Council should have approved the invasion of Iraq in mid-March 2003.

The Bush administration has said it reserves the right to make pre-emptive attacks to ensure US national security.

Annan said others felt that doctrine was "a grave threat to international peace and security, since it might imply that any state has the right to use force whenever it sees fit, without regard to other states' concerns.

"That is precisely the state of affairs which the United Nations was created to save humanity from," he said.

He said the best way to stop terrorism was by better cooperation and communication between countries "to ensure that terrorists are not given safe havens in their territories; to ensure that they are not given financial support; to ensure that they do not move around as freely as they used to."

"Yes, some countries have used force to deal with terrorism, but I see that as not the most essential part of fighting international terrorism," Annan said.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:34:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2004 5:34:48 PM EST by Da_Bunny]
If they had done that in the first place, our actions would have been unnecessary. We acted because the UN wouldn't.

The rest of the world is not going to be the targets of terrorist WMDs, Israel and the US will.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:35:25 PM EST
UN is useless.

CRC
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:35:32 PM EST
TRY IT
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:35:55 PM EST
We need to do a preemptive strike on Coffee Anon.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:37:05 PM EST
Where does the UN get their troops?

That's what I thought.

CRC
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:37:23 PM EST
Well count Russia and us (U.S.A.) out.

Who else matters?
F'm and feed em' fish
IBTL
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:38:36 PM EST
Why are those idiots still here?
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:38:54 PM EST

Annan said others felt that doctrine was "a grave threat to international peace and security, since it might imply that any state has the right to use force whenever it sees fit, without regard to other states' concerns.

"That is precisely the state of affairs which the United Nations was created to save humanity from



All this comming form a guy who has let hundreds of thousands if not millions die from geonocide in africa.

So full of shit

Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:39:03 PM EST

"Yes, some countries have used force to deal with terrorism, but I see that as not the most essential part of fighting international terrorism," Annan said.


It seems to me that many of the people who do not favor our action in Iraq only offer criticism and idealistic suggestions, but no realistic suggestions. That, and they speak out against it only to promote their own agenda.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:39:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2004 5:40:16 PM EST by motown_steve]

Originally Posted By kill-9:
"Indeed, the first purpose of the United Nations, laid down in Article 1 of the Charter, is 'to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace'," Annan said.

"We must show that the United Nations is capable of fulfilling that purpose, so that states do not feel obliged or entitled to take the law into their own hands."




I would love to see try it!
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:40:04 PM EST
UN hasn't acted in the Sudan w/ force.

Well now we know why.

CRC
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:40:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:


Annan said others felt that doctrine was "a grave threat to international peace and security, since it might imply that any state has the right to use force whenever it sees fit, without regard to other states' concerns.





ANY nation may use force to protect itself whren it sees fit. WTF is wrong with these people?
I dont give a shit if someone gets offended that we killed people in a preemptive strike that would have harmed us if left unchecked. FUCK the rest of the planet. IDIOTS
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:42:11 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2004 5:43:44 PM EST by Da_Bunny]
PRC is training troops for UN peacekeeping. They watch us work and get ideas. Wal-Mart shoppers are buying China a new military and they have lots of old gear they can unload around the world.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:42:47 PM EST
Fuck the UN
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:43:53 PM EST

Originally Posted By Da_Bunny:
PRC is training troops for UN peacekeeping. They watch us work and get ideas.



I'm not afraid of the Chinese.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:44:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Fuck the UN



A big +1
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:46:25 PM EST
I hate that asshat.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:55:28 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2004 5:56:03 PM EST by Bullitt3401]
I guess Kofi doesn't remember GWB's words from a few years ago.

"You're either for us, or you're against us."

Fuck the U.N.

Scott
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:56:07 PM EST
Let them try and stop us.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:58:46 PM EST
Annan is a pussy.

The day of the useful UN is dead.
The day of the useless UN is here.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 5:58:47 PM EST
Fuck the UN, its leaders, its members, and US, for staying in it.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:05:14 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2004 6:08:02 PM EST by Boom_Stick]
[Shappelle]If the UN dont like it they should sanction me with their army. Huh? Wait! They got no army! Shut the fvck up! Shut - the - fvck - up![/Shappelle]



Oh yeah, fvck the UN.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:07:06 PM EST
I wish the UN building and all the pussies who work there would catch on fire and fucking go away. .
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:17:49 PM EST
Does it make me a bad person or is it against the CoC for me to wish death on that man? It really pisses me off that he walks around on my home continent and uses air meant for free people.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:28:49 PM EST
The role of the UN seems to be to keep power in the hands in which it currently is.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:40:11 PM EST
The UN is a SOCIALIST organization. Their goals and worldview has become directly at odds with the principals of Democracy that underpin the United States (and all nations that embrace democracy).

It's long past time to kick their fucking asses out of NY and withdraw our support. If they think we are such a scourge then fine, let them put their HQ in Brussels or perhaps one of the African nations. Let them get their money from a less "tainted" source than the "evil" United States.

They would dry up and blow away in a few years or become a TOTALLY toothless tiger.

The US would do FAR better to directly offer support to those nations that are willing to work toward common goals and let the others fend for themselves.

Our continued support for a SOCIALIST .org (and a corrupt one at that) is just insane.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:44:23 PM EST

The UN is a SOCIALIST organization. Their goals and worldview has become directly at odds with the principals of Democracy that underpin the United States (and all nations that embrace democracy).

It's long past time to kick their fucking asses out of NY and withdraw our support. If they think we are such a scourge then fine, let them put their HQ in Brussels or perhaps one of the African nations. Let them get their money from a less "tainted" source than the "evil" United States.

They would dry up and blow away in a few years or become a TOTALLY toothless tiger.

The US would do FAR better to directly offer support to those nations that are willing to work toward common goals and let the others fend for themselves.

Our continued support for a SOCIALIST .org (and a corrupt one at that) is just insane.




Well said & spot on my friend!
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:48:31 PM EST
Fumigate the building and sell it off for condos.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:54:15 PM EST
The UN didn't solve the problem in Somalia, when the USA left after the "Battle of the Black Sea" aka "Blackhawk Down," incident, the country reverted back into the pre-UN days. The UN can't count on too many successes without USA help.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 6:58:05 PM EST

Annan: U.N. must prevent preemptive strikes



Oh? and how exactly would they do this?
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:00:03 PM EST
The U.N. and Kofi Annan are saying this in the hopes that Kerry is elected.
After all, Kerry is the U.N.s wet dream come true, a U.S. president that would ask permission before he takes any action, and the perfect puppet for the U.N. to project power through.

Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:01:12 PM EST
The UN can't even solve it's own problems because they are mired down in the Iraq's Saddum Hussien Oil for Food controversy, and the UN troops are responsible for pillaging the very country they're assign to protect. Bad, bad.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:01:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/11/2004 7:07:42 PM EST by jor-el]
Name me one incident where the UN was able to successfully enforce its mandate with troops NOT FROM THE USA, UK, OR SOVIET UNION/RUSSIAN FEDERATION. Including the russians was a lark on my part. Never remember them sending troops anywhere for the UN. For that matter, if the aforementioned nations walked out on the UN, who would pay its bills? CHINA? For troops to move, you have to feed them, equip them, arm them, and PAY them before you even think of moving them. The only thing keeping them afloat at Turtle Bay is the US govt. teat. Take US out of the equation and they would become another League of Nations.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:06:01 PM EST
Hey Kofi...you sellin wolf tickets?

"cause if you are, we're buyin'

Uh huh...that's what I thought.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:24:25 PM EST
Simple answer...

You & WHO'S ARMY?

Certainly not ours (or the Brits, Australians, Russians, Polish, etc...)

You're in a pretty sad state when the best military power you can hope to have answer your call (Germany) hasn't won a single war in over a century....
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:42:26 PM EST
I still say fuck the UN. The place should be torn . You can't even use the building for the homeless as it is FULL of asbestos.

Bulldoze it into the east river & throw all those petty tyrants, 2 bit dictators & despots the hell out of our country.

Big talking pussys if you ask me. The UN wouldn't exsist if it weren't for the USA.

Fuck those guys & the horse they rode in on!

Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:50:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Beijing - The United Nations must show it is tough enough to ensure the security of its members



See, I can stop right there and the bullshit meter is already pegged.

The UN isn't even tough enough to keep Sudan off the Human Rights Council.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 7:54:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By sniper1az:
I still say fuck the UN. The place should be torn . You can't even use the building for the homeless as it is FULL of asbestos.



Leave it for the rats and you'd still have a better class of tenant.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 8:00:19 PM EST
What "STATE" is making pre-emptive strikes? Texas? Iowa? Kansas? Is the US a state in some bigger country?
How about the state of Confusion.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 8:18:31 PM EST
America has always been a unilateral country. That is something to be proud of. It means we do what is right for US. The UN can be a positive force in some things, but we frickin OWN them. Without the US going along with a UN policy, it will never happen. Look how many troops have been deployed to Sudan... We have a permanent veto in the security council. If the UN doesnt do what we want, we'll do it ourselves (like we did in Iraq). That is how American foreign policy has always been conducted, and it works. Thank God we are strong enough to do what we want/need to do - that's why military power is THE MOST IMPORTANT THING for a country to have.
Link Posted: 10/11/2004 8:38:57 PM EST
The UN defines the peace as an absence of conflict. Not as justice, not as freedom or liberty, not as a high standard of living, but as a simple absence of conflict. I think there are some things more important than simple lack of conflict.

I also notice that the UN refers to sovreign NATIONS as states, like they are the federal government and the individual NATIONS are subservient states.
Link Posted: 10/12/2004 6:56:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By bobwrench:
The day of the useful UN is dead.
The day of the useless UN is here.



This can only really be said once our political leaders believe it and act on it.
Link Posted: 10/12/2004 6:58:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:
www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=126&art_id=qw1097486820272B226

Annan: UN must prevent pre-emptive strikes

October 11 2004 at 01:07PM

Beijing - The United Nations must show it is tough enough to ensure the security of its members so that individual countries do not take measures into their own hands, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said on Monday.

"Yes, some countries have used force to deal with terrorism, but I see that as not the most essential part of fighting international terrorism," Annan said.




How's he coming on stopping the genocide in the Sudan?
Link Posted: 10/12/2004 7:04:23 AM EST
Top Top