Quote:Why should anyone care about the UN if Bush doesn't? Simple: the UN may protect other people against Bush and others
But James that's just my point, the U.N cannot protect others from the greatest military and economic might in the west and other member nations are aware of this, they are also aware that they cannot override the United States when it counts the most, not without suffering the consequences.
Quote:Actually, they don't. There are many many cases of the US refusing to recognise or abide by international treaties and conventions. That doesn't mean those things don't exist.
And what happens when they refuse? What happens when Iraq refuses? If the U.N sets one standard and then the U.S does what it wants then the U.N has no power over the U.S or ability to make these standards stick. Think about it? What difference do those standards make in reality? The U.N has member dues and guess what the United States is the only country to not pay U.N dues, they simply refuse. There isnt anything the U.N can do about it because it is helpless against the mighty. The mighty of course being the U.S and what the U.S wants as opposed to all the other countries of which we refer to as the third world. This is why I say the U.N is a pyramid where western nations at the top dictate to the majority of members below, if the majority of members below disagree with those on top and set a standard, that standard is ignored. The standards are adhered to arbitrarily by those who have the power to resist without retribution. Iraq was never mighty and what might they did have was given to them through arms and finance by the U.S government. The U.N polices for the West, we cannot deny this, its a thin veil hiding global imperialism.
Quote:Education is the key. Mothers circumcise their daughters because they know no better. PM is clearly uneducated about women's rights, and also has an entrenched worldview. People don't change their minds in an instant; it is often a very slow process to win hearts and minds, even where the cause is right. Homophobes are uneducated about homosexuals, and hence fear them. Advocates of the death sentence tend to be more interested in retribution than in preventing unfair executions, which they often do not acknowledge as occurring.
Well this is where I disagree with you. These mother's themselves have been circumcised. How are you going to 'educate' them when the entire culture supports this ritual. The ritual may peter out over time and the culture revolutionize itself over time, but from the inside out, not at the insistence of the west. It is obnoxious and in the spirit of the missionary for us to say we are going to 'educate' those poor unknowing africans. Can you not see why so many have a viceral resistance towards this attitude? A viceral resistance stemming from colonialism and all those who came to 'teach' them? PM is educated in the West. There are many conservative muslims who have been born and educated in the west and adhere to a conservative image of woman. There are many Islamic women in the west who are educated and perceive their way of life as the best way for them, it is there choice. If an african woman decides to not perform female mutilation come what may then she is in the process of revolutionizing her society, but that will be her choice. 'Uneducated'? Do you say the same about Mormons in Utah who practise polygamy? Why don't we assume that these men and women are not educated? why don't we send 'teams' to show them the light? What about orthodox jews? Many of their marriages are arranged. Women cut their hair and cover it as a sign of modesty, it is law for them (try renting the israeli movie Kadosh), they sometimes mistreat their wives. Do assume they are unknowing and uneducated about womens rights or do we just accept them as living a religious life and leave them be? What about western domestic violence? We do not say its because they are uneducated no, then we say its because of jimmy's childhood or the woman suffers from low self esteem, but we do not chalk it all up to lack of education and say we have to now 'teach' them. I also don't believe that all homophobes are 'fearful' they just don't like them and it is their right to dislike whomever they please just like its the right of a racist to not want to associate with blacks or whites or whomever. If they break the law then they should suffer the penalty under the law but the term 'hate' crimes is a crock of shit, crime is crime whatever the motive.
Quote:What I don't agree with, and what I've been arguing against all along, is that the rapist should for some reason get off more lightly if a woman is dressed "provocatively" when he rapes her. There is no cultural standard by which this result could be justified, in my opinion. It seems to me that you think differently, but you haven't managed to clearly express why so far.
I dont disagree with you here but PM has a point of view, just like those who think that just because you kill someone doesn't mean its murder one, it can be aggravated manslaughter or second degree murder.
Quote:No, I want problems fixed in the US and elsewhere. It's not one or the other. It's not too much to hope and strive for both
Yes it is because the only way to pull it off is to globally police and set up a global judicial branch, override national sovereignty and set up a global education system overriding local cultural and religious institutions. And in case you are wondering I am against that. I think its time for the West to mind its own business, they tend to create more problems than they solve. We are so quick to underestimate how, when, and in what way other people solve their own problems. You don't see african blacks having panels on how to solve the problems and re-educate americans on the issue of racism, you don't see the danish sending dignitaries to the States to show them how they can offer health care to all their citizens or take better care of the environment. If you don't see what I am getting at then I don't know what else to say.
Quote: I'm not aware of all the factors which were in play in that particular situation. On the other hand, I agree entirely that it is morally bankrupt to sit back and watch a genocide.The UN, as you have pointed out, is not a powerful organisation. It must work through its member states. Many times, it may like to act, but without state support it is powerless. As I said, I do not believe that is a good situation.
About Rwanda:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Heroes/Gen_Romeo_Dallaire.html
About Srebenica:
http://pub18.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm34.showMessage?topicID=12.topic
Well there again it is not the member states that are the problem but the one nation that controls where, when and how the ball is rolled. Here is an excerpt from the above link:
"The US and NATO: Heroes of Our Time?
The US has played a very dirty game." - said one officer at UNPROFOR Headquarters in Zagreb. The US always made loud noises about the atrocities being committed in Bosnia. Until Dayton paved the way for IFOR , they never let a single troop set foot in Bosnia. Still, Presidents Bush and Clinton, have always taken the moral high ground - accusing Europe of complacency as genocide was committed on its doorstep.
Once more the US could lord over Europe - pointing to its own intervention in bringing about a "cessation of hostilities," at the end of 1995."
I think the U.N should be dissolved. I think that the United States needs to bring its troops home and intervene only upon request and willingness of the american people (no drafting and no sending boys to war without full consent of the u.s citizens). I think that Asia and Africa should create separate leagues with their own neighbors to perform the task of solving human rights problems within their own areas. I think that people need to take responsibilty for their own nations and not demoted to begging hands. I think that these separate leagues should be free to assist each other if they feel it necessary. A league in Asia would have no right to decide the agenda of the league in africa etc. We cannot expect the one or two economically viable and militarily strong countries to solve the worlds problem, nor an incompetent organization. If we look at hunger we know that war is a factor in hunger, especially in Africa, but food aid creates dependency. Read Collins and Lappe World Hunger: 12 Myths this was their assessment:
1. A poor farming family considers children a source of labor in the fields
and social security for their parents' old age.
2. In spite of technological advances such as irrigation projects, new
improved seeds, and machinery the poor farmer is not much better off.
3 There is enough grain to provide everyone in the world an adequate diet
(3000 calories/day).
4. Food aid is only a temporary solution.
The issue of hunger is not a competition between developed and
developing countries.
5. Consumers and farmers in both rich and poor countries suffer from high
food prices and the expanding role of large corporations in food
production.
6. Poor farmers in developing countries need to be given an active role in
decisions about the land and the type of crops to be grown.
7. Land which could be used to grow food for the population of a developing
country has been converted to cash crops by large landowners.
8. When families are able to have food, security and good health care, many
will choose to have fewer children.
9. Overpopulation is not the cause of hunger; hunger is one of the causes of
overpopulation.
10. In 1991, the UN Food and Agricultural Organization reported a record
world production of staple foods.
11. The problem is not the supply of food; it is unequal distribution of food.
Sending food aid creates dependency and fosters paternalistic attitudes.
12. Large multinational food corporations control much of the world's food
trade.
13. The modem methods require more investment, something only rich
landowners can afford
Truth is poverty makes the west wealthier:
(95')
"While Congress considers slashing U.S. aid to developing countries, a study released today by a leading international research center shows that foreign aid creates U.S. jobs by expanding overseas markets. Agriculture aid, which helps strengthen the farm-dominated economies in many developing countries, actually increases the amounts of food and other products that those countries buy from export markets, said the report by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)."
A world in chaos helps boost Western business: Excerpt from House Armed Services Committee article
"...the United States, by far the world's largest weapons exporter with $15 billion in annual business. Britain, Israel, Russia, France, Germany, China and Sweden are among other major players."
http://www.clw.org/atop/global_companies-large.html
http://www.clw.org/atop/global.html
The truth is that hunger, war, poverty and injustice are big business . The west cannot cause trouble with one hand and then pretend to want to solve it with the other and expect outside nations not to notice the hypocrisy.