Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 7/11/2002 3:46:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 3:49:23 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 3:54:00 AM EST
Methinks U.N. peacekeeping is a pissing-in-the-ocean proposition anyway. Let's disband the worthless organization and spin off any parts of it that do charitable work.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 4:16:49 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 4:27:44 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/11/2002 4:28:33 AM EST by The_Beer_Slayer]
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 4:36:18 AM EST
I think MARVL has the right idea. Maybe we could just cut funding and watch the whole organization go down the toilet. [:D]
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 4:40:28 AM EST
[red]United Nations Armed Forces will have immunity.[/red] This court will make The United Nations Armed Forces the only place that a warrior can be sure that he will not be imprisoned for plying his chosen profession. No immunity means the end of professional soldiers under our flag. It is just a matter of when. [red]The damage done by Clinton and his crew of traitors continues.[/red]
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 4:54:35 AM EST
Originally Posted By Goad: [red]The damage done by Clinton and his crew of traitors continues.[/red]
View Quote
PLEASE.....It doesn't matter who is in office, tweedely-dee, or tweedely-dum, the agenda goes forward....
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 5:29:56 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 5:40:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By ilikelegs: AND THERE'S NOT A DAMN THING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT EITHER. They already have thousands of U.N. vehicles stationed all over America.
View Quote
Got a link or reference for that? I've heard that claim before, and all anyone seems to be able to come up with is (undated) pictures of US military vehicles (HMMWVs, APCs) either on their way to or back from UN "peacekeeping" missions and not yet re-CARC painted. Oh, and by the way, Bush is a [b]PUSSY![/b] Too big a fan of the UN to make a serious move in favor of US sovereignty. Put the prosecution of US "peacekeepers" up to paragons of virtue like Sudan and North Korea? Why not?
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 6:04:28 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 6:23:43 AM EST
Riddle me this, Batman: When US troops go on UN "peacekeeping" missions, what do you expect them to ride around in? US vehicles, maybe? Like HMMWVs, trucks, buses, ambulances, etc? And, if they're enforcing a UN mandate over in someplace like Allfuctupistan, what colors do you think the vehicles would have to be painted? UN colors, maybe? And, if they're US military vehicles, where do you think those vehicles would get painted in UN colors? Here in America in a US Army motor pool, or in a dirt field somewhere in Allfuctupistan with a few cans of Krylon? I'm guessing in a US Army motor pool. And then, when the "peacekeeping" mission is over and the vehicles are to be shipped back to America, where do you think would be a good place to repaint those US made, US Army vehicles back into their US Army colors? In US Army motor pools or in a dirt lot in the now-peaceful Republic of Allfuctupistan? I couldn't help noticing that there's no text provided on the sites where you got those pictures. There aren't any explanations or interviews of UN or US DOD personnel. There aren't even any wild theories. Just pictures. Color me skeptical.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 6:41:57 AM EST
1. Recognition of this kangaroo court is one more sign that the U.S. is on its way out, to be replaced by a word-wide u.n. government. They will be able to send in 'their' soldiers, tax your earnings, and hold individuals accountable to the socialist/comie laws of europe. Bush loses 'nads and gives up sovereignty by listening to advisors instead of his conscience. 2. The u.n. is here, and they have been here. They currently control a large portion of 'government owned' land through their biosphere management programs. 3. It is not too late, but if we do not abandon the u.n. and run them out of the U.S., we are doomed as a free nation. 4. If U.S. troops are assigned to a 'peace keeping' mission in this country, I expect our troops to be in U.S. marked vehicles and wearing U.S. uniforms. 5. F**K the u.n. just my $0.02 worth
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 6:42:26 AM EST
Perhaps it's a blessing in disguise and will serve as the primary impetus for keeping the US out of peace keeping missions in the first place. If we need to act unilaterally, than so be it. Just as the saying goes "We don't need no stinking badges", we don't need no stinking UN.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 6:47:32 AM EST
America has everything to loose; no other nation has anything to loose because they are all Socialist/ Communist countries with no freedom , no liberty, No other Nation has what we have. I say America can go it alone, only maintaining its NATO alliance (which is not UN). Hmmm... This is going to be a bad deal.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 7:02:41 AM EST
I betcha Patton is throwing one hellacious fit right now..
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 7:22:13 AM EST
You've hit it, FL_BOY, especially #5. IMHO, if the UN wants a "Peace Keeping Force", they should have a volunteer one. If U.S. citizens choose to serve, that's their option, but OUR troops, and OUR tax dollars shouldn't be supporting the rest of the world.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 7:28:51 AM EST
If I were still active duty, this would be enough to make me get out.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 7:43:09 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/11/2002 7:44:29 AM EST by ilikelegs]
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 7:55:18 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 8:17:11 AM EST
Well, in regards to not funding the UN, we wern't for several years.... Due to concerns about the UN offering abortion as part of it's 'population control', Congress (pre-2001) held back our UN dues... It made them mad (but there wasn't anything they could do about it), and Willy didn't like it too much either. Yes, we contributed troops and military support, but we didn't pay our dues... Then when Bush came in to office, paying off the UN became a PR move (back before 9/11) when everyone was criticizing him for being 'president of the US' (i.e. being 'unilateral' in regard to US interests). It is likely that this will 'fade to black' now that he doesn't have to worry much about PR on international issues. As for the logic of peacekeeping, it works in some cases, but not in others. For a peace to be enforcable, the majority of society must be ready for it, with only a distinct minority of 'die-hards' still interested in fighting. So it worked in Japan, the former Yugoslavia, Korea (that was a UN mission), and such but it will not work in Israel, and... As for the ICC, this 'backing down' is in name only. What we now ask for is 'give us 12 months to bring our guy home, and if you try to put him on trial, be warned - we're coming for him'. If this 12 month thing goes through, expect to see the 'authorization to rescue US personell from the ICC by military force' ammendment get tacked to something major... As for seeing the 'Black Helicopters' and such, the UN is too impotent to pose any real threat. Notice how they're so concerned about us taking our ball and going home? Also look at what happened to the last 'international body' that the US didn't join (the LN). They were toothless, innefective, and they fell apart (since the Europeans wouldn't fight to enforce the 'international mandates' they doled out (sound familliar??), the 'bad boy' countries just either blew off the LN or withdrew). Besides, the US can veto anything military-related that the UN does. Don't worry about a 'UN invasion' - worry about our politicians signing too many international conventions (Kyoto, ICC, etc...), as this is where the erosion comes from (Bush is right to be wary here, as treaties are (iirc) equivalent to constitutional ammendments if signed and ratified).
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 8:26:34 AM EST
HAHAHA! Didn't I say that dubyah would "change" his mind about the ICC? Don't think it was just under klinton either, it has been part of an ongoing plan outlined in the Department of State Publication 7277 since 1961! But noooooo the sheeple handwaivers refused to even read the documents dismissing it with stupid "black helicopter" and "tin foil hat" statements. You now deserve all that happens. [url=williamcooper.com/7277.htm]Department of State Publication 7277[/url] [url=www.cgg.ch/contents.htm]Our Global Neighbourhood: The report of the Commission on Global Governance[/url]
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 8:33:49 AM EST
Bush is batting a thousand isn't he? Where are the "it's a political strategy, he's really on our side" apologists now?
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 8:34:18 AM EST
Originally Posted By ilikelegs: What did they ride in during the Gulf War ? Our own vehicles. Are we a storage country for the UN as well ?
View Quote
That's right. During the Gulf War, US forces acted under their own command as part of a coalition, and so didn't need to repaint their vehicles, except to paint that "^" symbol on the side. In UN "peacekeeping" operations, all troops subordinate their national loyalties to that of the benevolent global peace overlords, and have to paint their vehicles to match each other. The French do this, the Brits do this and we do this. Once the units return from "peacekeeping" duty, they repaint their vehicles to the usual national paint scheme and throw away their powder blue helmets AKA target indicators.
We ship buses to control riots or store rioters in ? They need buses from us ?
View Quote
When I was in the Marine Corps, I rode in US government school-style buses several times. I imagine they would want them for transporting a platoon of troops or for evacuating civilian personnel, but this is just a guess.
You just asked for links, I found them for you in 5 minutes on google. And this was in response to my comment about seeing UN vehicles in America. My thread was about "U.S. Backs Down From Immunity -International Court". Not about proving the UN has vehicle's stored here. But I provided that as well with pictures. They are here, Why ? I don't know. Your arguments against the UN having them here is good enough to sway me and think everything is ok now...
View Quote
Everything's not okay, but I doubt that there are stockpiles of UN equipment here just waiting for Pakistani UN troops to come and disarm us all.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 8:47:16 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 9:02:40 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 9:42:23 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 10:34:30 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 11:35:58 AM EST
Gentlemen, The United Nations is striving toward our goal of peace and harmony throughout the world. In order to facilitate this goal we must have the power to bring to justice those criminals who would act contrary to the laws of man. Government representatives who overstep these boundaries must be tried in an international court in order to receive true, fair and equitable justice. I applaud President George W. Bush on his decision to allow the United States to participate. Only through the actions of great leaders may the peoples of the world unite. Your great nation will continue to serve as a beacon of hope throughout the world. Further, I find the assertion of United Nations forces being utilized on United States soil laughable. The United Nations has no intent of invading the United States Of America for any purpose. Thank You.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 11:40:54 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 11:43:24 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 11:49:20 AM EST
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 11:59:41 AM EST
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
Originally Posted By ilikelegs: What did they ride in during the Gulf War ? Our own vehicles. Are we a storage country for the UN as well ?
View Quote
That's right. During the Gulf War, US forces acted under their own command as part of a coalition, and so didn't need to repaint their vehicles, except to paint that "^" symbol on the side. In UN "peacekeeping" operations, all troops subordinate their national loyalties to that of the benevolent global peace overlords, and have to paint their vehicles to match each other. The French do this, the Brits do this and we do this. Once the units return from "peacekeeping" duty, they repaint their vehicles to the usual national paint scheme and throw away their powder blue helmets AKA target indicators.
View Quote
Exactly...Also, the Gulf War was a [b]combat operation[/b],...not a [b]peace keeping mission[/b]....So, of course the troops weren't sporting UN colors. Even if the UN [b]had[/b] been in command of our troops, they wouldn't ride into combat in [b]white vehicles that stick out like a sore thumb[/b] those pics of the "UN" vehicles on the back of the trucks went around here sometime last year. Someone researched the article they came from and found out it really said something about the equipment being enroute to a NG armory or something like that to be re-painted, and put back into service, after returning from UN service. [b]that being said[/b].....I agree, the USA should get the phuck [b]out[/b] of the UN.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 6:00:10 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/11/2002 6:02:07 PM EST by anti-gov-tinfoil-man]
So what are the chances of this being the end of Americans going on UN "peacekeepin" (=world government building) missions? My guess is with a spineless vote maximizer like bush (no caps on his name any more) in office is that we'll be seing americans before this court after a while. Fuck bush, fuck the UN, and fuck the evil NWO creeps puting these plans into action. What the hell can the average guy do to counter stuff like this? Write letters (ha ha ha effective right) to our so called leaders? I'll choose to buy and cache more guns n ammo.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 9:27:05 PM EST
[flame]
Originally Posted By KofiAnnan: Gentlemen, The United Nations is striving toward our goal of peace and harmony throughout the world. In order to facilitate this goal we must have the power to bring to justice those criminals who would act contrary to the laws of man. Government representatives who overstep these boundaries must be tried in an international court in order to receive true, fair and equitable justice.
View Quote
[whacko] _______________________________________________________ Yea, the UN needs to expand it's chain of brothels and corrupt UN police will act as pimps. _________________________________________________
I applaud President George W. Bush on his decision to allow the United States to participate. Only through the actions of great leaders may the peoples of the world unite. Your great nation will continue to serve as a beacon of hope throughout the world.
View Quote
______________________________________________________________________ We already do that. We do not needs any stinking lowlife corrupt bunch of Euro trash playing monday morning quarterback. _______________________________________________________________________
Further, I find the assertion of United Nations forces being utilized on United States soil laughable. The United Nations has no intent of invading the United States Of America for any purpose.
View Quote
_______________________________________________________________________ Well lets see, how many bridges do you think you can sell? Here's an idea, we'll bring the guns and ammo and you bring the targets. [heavy] _______________________________________________________________________ Thank You.
View Quote
[chainsawkill]
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 9:38:12 PM EST
Originally Posted By lostwildcat:
Originally Posted By ilikelegs:
Originally Posted By KofiAnnan: Gentlemen, I find the assertion of United Nations forces being utilized on United States soil laughable. The United Nations has no intent of invading the United States Of America for any purpose. Thank You.
View Quote
I find it laughable as well. We'd be kicking your U.N. ass all over Texas!
View Quote
Alabama too!! Think the UN guys ever seen "Deliverance" "Squeal like a pig UN boy, Squeal!! Squeal!!" Not me I'm married..but there are some guys in Walker Co. that would have a field day with those pretty boys in blue hats.
View Quote
And those Californians who aren't busy buggering each other or tieing themselves to ancient redwood trees will help out too! Long live the Golden State!
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 9:57:32 PM EST
Originally Posted By Benjamin0001: I say America can go it alone, only maintaining its NATO alliance (which is not UN).
View Quote
Actually, NATO is an affiliate of the UN. It was organized under the UN Charter(just look at the NATO treaty.)
Originally Posted By anti-gov-tinfoil-man: So what are the chances of this being the end of Americans going on UN "peacekeepin" (=world government building) missions? My guess is with a spineless vote maximizer like bush (no caps on his name any more) in office is that we'll be seing americans before this court after a while. Fuck bush, fuck the UN, and fuck the evil NWO creeps puting these plans into action. What the hell can the average guy do to counter stuff like this? Write letters (ha ha ha effective right) to our so called leaders? I'll choose to buy and cache more guns n ammo.
View Quote
Here's a start: [url=http://www.getusout.com]Get US out, of the UN[/url] According to the recent issue of The New American, the Idaho GOP just passed a resolution urging their congressional delegation to get the US out of the UN.
Link Posted: 7/11/2002 10:33:03 PM EST
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: HAHAHA! Didn't I say that dubyah would "change" his mind about the ICC? ....
View Quote
Well, he has to be thinking about his place in history.
Top Top