Peacekeepers Abusing Children

[Kathianne]

The problem is that the UN relies on member countries to send troops and workers. Call me a racist pig but some of the countries they get them from have very different values to the western model that the UN represents (that should get me a bite or two). So hey have soldiers trading weapons for money, food for sex (with prostitutes or desparate kids) all without compunction because they're basically shitbags. But since the west, which tends to have peacekeepers and workers with higher values (albeit the odd invididual will get through) isn't sending enough of them then the UN has to get them from wherever they can. They get the dregs.

But the UN will not publicise the nations involved because it's frightened of the supply drying up. They will also not investigate these claims for fear of the same thing.

So, the only option is for the west to get more influence in the UN. Very difficult I know but better than backing out even more.

What you are suggesting is just more exercises in futility. All that the UN wants now is the US money, equipment, knowledge, and man power, while whacking us for being the scourge upon the world. Why would we leave all that?

[diuretic]

What you are suggesting is just more exercises in futility. All that the UN wants now is the US money, equipment, knowledge, and man power, while whacking us for being the scourge upon the world. Why would we leave all that?

No, I'm just putting things in perspective. The focus is on the behaviour of peacekeepers and other workers. I explained the problem and suggested it was complex. And I provided some criticism of the UN. These are things that need to be corrected but they can't be corrected if the US pulls out. Personally I would feel uncomfortable (major understatement) if the US pulled out and left it to others to fill the vacuum. Best to stay in there and kick arses until things are corrected.

[Kathianne]

No, I'm just putting things in perspective. The focus is on the behaviour of peacekeepers and other workers. I explained the problem and suggested it was complex. And I provided some criticism of the UN. These are things that need to be corrected but they can't be corrected if the US pulls out. Personally I would feel uncomfortable (major understatement) if the US pulled out and left it to others to fill the vacuum. Best to stay in there and kick arses until things are corrected.

I doubt we'll pull out, though I personally wish we would and make that clear to my representatives. Here's the problem, we CAN'T kick anyone's asses, in fact no matter the number of carrots, the realignment of the UN in the political maps of the 60's and 70's prevents any 1st world countries from leading.

It's past time to come up with an alternative, but the politicos just tend to the status quo, whether the League of Nations or the UN, until forced to look at reality.

[diuretic]

I doubt we'll pull out, though I personally wish we would and make that clear to my representatives. Here's the problem, we CAN'T kick anyone's asses, in fact no matter the number of carrots, the realignment of the UN in the political maps of the 60's and 70's prevents any 1st world countries from leading.

It's past time to come up with an alternative, but the politicos just tend to the status quo, whether the League of Nations or the UN, until forced to look at reality.

I have to admit I am annoyed, nay, angered, at the tinpot dictators who can get away with all sorts of vicious oppression. That dirty filthy bastard Mugabe and those rotten sociopathic grubs in Burma (I refuse to use its other name, my father fought there in WWII, it will always be Burma to me) need to be flushed down the world's toilet. But the UN can't do it and nor can any other country. Gunboat diplomacy died with the Britsh Empire.

No, I don't have an answer, but I don't see a single superpower (whichever it is) running everything as the solution (I know you're not putting that forward). I don't reject the idea of the UN, I'm just annoyed with how things are at the moment but then I'm not advocating its abolition and I will, if possible, hop in and defend it - albeit through gritted teeth.

[Kathianne]

I have to admit I am annoyed, nay, angered, at the tinpot dictators who can get away with all sorts of vicious oppression. That dirty filthy bastard Mugabe and those rotten sociopathic grubs in Burma (I refuse to use its other name, my father fought there in WWII, it will always be Burma to me) need to be flushed down the world's toilet. But the UN can't do it and nor can any other country. Gunboat diplomacy died with the Britsh Empire.

No, I don't have an answer, but I don't see a single superpower (whichever it is) running everything as the solution (I know you're not putting that forward). I don't reject the idea of the UN, I'm just annoyed with how things are at the moment but then I'm not advocating its abolition and I will, if possible, hop in and defend it - albeit through gritted teeth.

Perhaps it's the nature of the West? We blame ourselves for our wrongs and perhaps more for unintended wrongs? We really do not credit ourselves for the good we do, until attacked in some form. Kind of reminds me of religion. It seems the West doesn't ally in venues like the UN, rather we try to convince solid blocks of 2nd and 3rd world nations that we really want to 'get along' and not gang up on them. It's proven very ineffective, failed, really.

[diuretic]

Perhaps it's the nature of the West? We blame ourselves for our wrongs and perhaps more for unintended wrongs? We really do not credit ourselves for the good we do, until attacked in some form. Kind of reminds me of religion. It seems the West doesn't ally in venues like the UN, rather we try to convince solid blocks of 2nd and 3rd world nations that we really want to 'get along' and not gang up on them. It's proven very ineffective, failed, really.

Perhaps - and I'm aware of being some sort of armchair-pop psycho/historio/socio whatever - it's a leftover from our collective guilt about previous generations and their imperialism. Personally I don't subscribe to that. Call me a racist pig if you like but the recent events in South Africa where South Africans murdered and oppressed economic refugees from other southern African countries convinces me that everything wasn't exactly sweetness and light before Cecil Rhodes and other European imperialists. But that's another argument.

I've said this before here and I don't apologise for repeating it. Western values are superior in both an historical and contemporary sense. They're superior because they represent the apotheosis - so far at least (and to my critics, please note the tentative nature of my claim) - of humaniity. There is a complete concordance between the west's values on human rights and the nature of humanity. There are far too many nations and cultures in the rest of the world that deny that.

The values of the UN should be the values of the west.

Hey, I'm a cultural Nazi! I'm not really but I'm just getting ready to deal with the accusation.

[mundame]

The problem is that the UN relies on member countries to send troops and workers. Call me a racist pig but some of the countries they get them from have very different values to the western model that the UN represents (that should get me a bite or two). So hey have soldiers trading weapons for money, food for sex (with prostitutes or desparate kids) all without compunction because they're basically shitbags.

Okay..........good point, that these are not necessarily, probably not even USUALLY Westerners. And some of these UN types basically screw anything that moves and aren't too particular about that.

However, a lot are Westerners, I bet, because we HAVE seen two big scandals lately involving the French working in these areas.

And this is what is going on, I think: it's the same as every other childcare job: the men it attracts are pedophiles. Teachers, scoutmasters, Santa Clauses, priests ------------------------- if they are caring for children, watch out for the kiddie-feelers, because that is why they take those jobs!!!!

Think about it: what else are they going to do? That's where the children ARE. If they can get a job with them, they can do anything they want. Refugee camps? A Mecca for these guys, they're homefree, they've got open season on any child they want to molest. Of course they volunteer for these "humanitarian" jobs.

But the UN will not publicise the nations involved because it's frightened of the supply drying up. They will also not investigate these claims for fear of the same thing.

Sure. The whole POINT of the UN is that it is the world's substitute for having to do anything: that's its function. Everyone says, oh, let the UN do it, and the UN can't, so that's that. Everyone forgets about it and the UN pretends, all the while letting the corruption of its employees full rein.

So, the only option is for the west to get more influence in the UN. Very difficult I know but better than backing out even more.

The best option, IMO, is to disband the UN. McCain wants to do that and substitute a union of democracies. The UN is opposed to U.S. interests and long has been opposed to us, and yet we house it and pay for it. It's worth is that we then don't have to DO anything about Darfur, Burma, Somalia, Yemen, Zimbabwe, etc., etc. and that's good: nothing that goes on in those places (except for the near-sinking of the U.S.S. Cole) has anything at all to do with U.S. interests. So the UN is useful for not doing anything. Otherwise, it's opposed to U.S. interests and its corruption has by now reached such incredible depths -- sexual and monetary -- that I do think the world would be better off without it.

[Psychoblues]

Sheesh!!!!!! The post was about peacekeepers diddling the kids and the rest is trying to excuse the diddling on the UN. I don't think the UN is responsible at all for the diddlings of the perverts.

[Kathianne]

Sheesh!!!!!! The post was about peacekeepers diddling the kids and the rest is trying to excuse the diddling on the UN. I don't think the UN is responsible at all for the diddlings of the perverts.

Then of course the US is not responsible for the problems with their misfits? Or France? Or England? Or Russia? Or China?

[82Marine89]

Sheesh!!!!!! The post was about peacekeepers diddling the kids and the rest is trying to excuse the diddling on the UN. I don't think the UN is responsible at all for the diddlings of the perverts.

Does that mean the Catholic church isn't responsible for pedophile priests?

[Psychoblues]

Are you saying the UN has covered up the diddlings of the diddlers within it's authority?

Does that mean the Catholic church isn't responsible for pedophile priests?

The Holy Father may forgive you, but I won't. Have you ever listened to Lyle Lovette?

[82Marine89]

Sheesh!!!!!! The post was about peacekeepers diddling the kids and the rest is trying to excuse the diddling on the UN. I don't think the UN is responsible at all for the diddlings of the perverts.

Does that mean the Catholic church isn't responsible for pedophile priests?

Are you saying the UN has covered up the diddlings of the diddlers within it's authority?

Does that mean the Catholic church isn't responsible for pedophile priests?

The Holy Father may forgive you, but I won't. Have you ever listened to Lyle Lovette?

You said the UN wasn't responsible for the diddlers. It's right up there in quotes. I asked if that meant the Catholic church wasn't responsible for pedophile priests? Using your reasoning I made the comparison. It's like politics, congress screws up and the president gets the blame. The UN, being the organization in charge, is automatically to blame. Doesn't matter if you like it, that's the way it is.

[Psychoblues]

Your prez is an idiot and regularly fucks up, m'89.

You said the UN wasn't responsible for the diddlers. It's right up there in quotes. I asked if that meant the Catholic church wasn't responsible for pedophile priests? Using your reasoning I made the comparison. It's like politics, congress screws up and the president gets the blame. The UN, being the organization in charge, is automatically to blame. Doesn't matter if you like it, that's the way it is.

I didn't say he was a diddler but he has certainly fucked up a lot of American kids. Accept it. He is your problem and me and those like me intend to correct that problem for you as it is obvious you cannot correct it for yourselves.

John McCain? Give me a common freakin' break?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?