or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › UN might threaten sanctions on Sudan
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

UN might threaten sanctions on Sudan

post #1 of 70
Thread Starter 
Look out Sudan! The UN is getting to maybe threaten sanctions someday. Better start acting right.

U.N. council OKs resolution to act on Sudan crisis
Quote:
U.N. council OKs resolution to act on Sudan crisis

U.S. says sanctions still possible if Darfur violence isn't stopped

From Jonathan Wald
CNN
Friday, July 30, 2004 Posted: 6:43 PM EDT (2243 GMT)

UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- The U.N. Security Council voted overwhelmingly Friday in favor of a U.S.-backed resolution implicitly threatening to impose sanctions if the government of Sudan does not stop atrocities in the Darfur region within 30 days.

Thirteen members of the council voted for the resolution, with China and Pakistan abstaining.

After the vote, French President Jacques Chirac announced France would send some humanitarian troops to Darfur.

...


I know I'd be scared.
post #2 of 70
So the US should invade, right? I mean if we don't want to be in the same league as those pussies at the UN.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #3 of 70
Thread Starter 
Yea that's exactly what I'm saying you read my mind you're a genius.
post #4 of 70
Hmm?!

It could be fake but it looks like real results to me: Bowing to UN Demands, Sudan Says it Will Disarm Arab Militias
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #5 of 70
Oh, and look at this . . . . America does nothing, but the French are sending troops: FRENCH SEND TROOPS TO BORDER
Those surrender monkeys . . . they're just trying to make us look bad!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #6 of 70
Thread Starter 
Yes great pfflam you're doing your part. 200 French troops. They're at the border

Maybe in another 6 months when 50,000 people are dead and the UN decides that it's now time to maybe think about actual sanctions (before they cave do to pressure from arab muslim countries) ... I'll drag this thread back up.
post #7 of 70
By all means, Scott, drag the thread up whenever you like.

"UN pussies won't get any results!"
- "Well they agreed to comply with UN demands."
"FRANCE SUCKS!"

proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #8 of 70
Thread Starter 
Ye and we all know once someone agree to comply with UN the job is over. Dust your hands off. Job well done!
post #9 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Ye and we all know once someone agree to comply with UN the job is over. Dust your hands off. Job well done!

What the hell do you want here scott? Do you want us to send the troops we don't have available to Sudan? Do you want other countries to send the troops they don't have to Sudan(in case you didn't know this most other countries don't maintain huge standing armies)? I'm trying to figure out why you started this thread. The UN is taking action. The US is onboard with the UN's actions (we postponed a security council vote for 30 days to allow Sudan the time to comply). What do you want specifically? Its silly to start a thread without meaning, rhyme or reason. What do you want? Do you want us to carpet bomb Sudan and let Shell take the oil? What do you want? Simple question answer it without snide smart-ass avoiding answers if you can.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #10 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
What the hell do you want here scott? Do you want us to send the troops we don't have available to Sudan? Do you want other countries to send the troops they don't have to Sudan(in case you didn't know this most other countries don't maintain huge standing armies)? I'm trying to figure out why you started this thread. The UN is taking action. The US is onboard with the UN's actions (we postponed a security council vote for 30 days to allow Sudan the time to comply). What do you want specifically? Its silly to start a thread without meaning, rhyme or reason. What do you want? Do you want us to carpet bomb Sudan and let Shell take the oil? What do you want? Simple question answer it without snide smart-ass avoiding answers if you can.

Well I'll second that.

Scott, you're pretty much on record as regarding the UN as useless.

You also support the president's unilateral invasion of Iraq, brushing aside the obsolete UN in favor of vigorous direct action.

So the UN lives down to your expectations. So what? More evidence in your book that they have no role to play in pax americana, so what is to be done?


There aren't any other world bodies. By your lights the United States is the only power that has the cojones to get anything done, so.....

It's up to us. Which means direct military action. So my first response was not sarcastic, it seems to me to be the inevitable logic of your world view.

Unless of course you just want to get off on pointing out how useless the UN is and don't really care about what happens in Sudan.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #11 of 70
Thread Starter 
The UN is not a serious organization. I don't think you could even call it a paper tiger. It's a paper weasel at best.

Oh and addabox it's hard to have a unilateral multilateral invasion. If the US is going it alone what are all those other countries doing there?
post #12 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
The UN is not a serious organization. I don't think you could even call it a paper tiger. It's a paper weasel at best.

Oh and addabox it's hard to have a unilateral multilateral invasion. If the US is going it alone what are all those other countries doing there?

Why didn't you answer my question(s)?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #13 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
Why didn't you answer my question(s)?

I did.
post #14 of 70
No, no, no- what Scott is trying to do is draw your attention to this issue so you can see how it unfolds over the coming months. How many "severest consequences" resolutions will be passed over how many mos/years vs. how many more people die every passing week. Let's see how this pans out. Let's see what the UN is able to get done this time. Let's see how well the humanitarian needs get served here. I don't see Scott advocating a bombing campaign, so do not muddy the waters with such assertions. The way I see it, this is the UN's big chance to do things "by the book" and make things better.

People here have cited that assistance should have gone to this part of the world well before even worrying about Iraq. So now they are getting attention. They can stop complaining about unwarranted attention in one place and ignoring another. That's all this topic is about, imo.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #15 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
The UN is not a serious organization. I don't think you could even call it a paper tiger. It's a paper weasel at best.

Oh and addabox it's hard to have a unilateral multilateral invasion. If the US is going it alone what are all those other countries doing there?

You mean the 20,000 (and shrinking) "coalition" troops vs. the 145,000 (and growing) American troops? Well, I would say the overwhelming bulk of them (half coming from Great Britain alone) are there because European leaders like Tony Blair figure it's better to play ball with the Bush administration than to risk the political fall-out of publicly breaking with Washington (all though these countries seem to be on their way to a generalized liberal uprising as a consequence of the vast divide between their leadership and the citizenry).

The balance are purely ceremonial and serve to almost comically inflate the list of the "willing" (big shout out to Monaco and New Guinea).

Now, again, given your contempt for the UN, what's to be done? I believe that is the question.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #16 of 70
Thread Starter 
Any military operation that the US undertook that included troops from other armies would be overwhelmingly american. But you can't redefine "unilateral" and "multilateral" to fit your anti-US bias.
post #17 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
I did.

No you didn't, and anyone else reading this thread can clearly see that you have not addressed "what would you do scott?"

Just to recap all of your responses in one place so you can point out where you answered my question:

Quote:
1
Look out Sudan! The UN is getting to maybe threaten sanctions someday. Better start acting right.

U.N. council OKs resolution to act on Sudan crisis

I know I'd be scared.

Quote:
2
Yea that's exactly what I'm saying you read my mind you're a genius.

Quote:
3
Yes great pfflam you're doing your part. 200 French troops. They're at the border

Maybe in another 6 months when 50,000 people are dead and the UN decides that it's now time to maybe think about actual sanctions (before they cave do to pressure from arab muslim countries) ... I'll drag this thread back up.

Quote:
4
Ye and we all know once someone agree to comply with UN the job is over. Dust your hands off. Job well done!

Quote:
5
The UN is not a serious organization. I don't think you could even call it a paper tiger. It's a paper weasel at best.

Oh and addabox it's hard to have a unilateral multilateral invasion. If the US is going it alone what are all those other countries doing there?

Quote:
6
I did.

Quote:
7
Any military operation that the US undertook that included troops from other armies would be overwhelmingly american. But you can't redefine "unilateral" and "multilateral" to fit your anti-US bias.

So I'll ask again--What would you do right now to help Sudan Scott? Would you have America invade yet another country? Would you have A thrid party country invade Sudan? Would you use sanctions as a tool to guide change?

I want to know because without that answer, this thread has no substance and is simply designed to place the UN in a fail/fail situation. Until you answer the question no matter what the UN does will be not enough.

So, what would you do Scott?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #18 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
So, what would you do Scott?

Most likely he would simply ignore your questions and continue with his dishonest and disingenuous responses. At least that's the pattern I've seen from him.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #19 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by faust9
I want to know because without that answer, this thread has no substance and is simply designed to place the UN in a fail/fail situation. Until you answer the question no matter what the UN does will be not enough.

You were speaking of glass houses?... \
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #20 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
You were speaking of glass houses?... \

No clue what you mean by that.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #21 of 70
Thread Starter 
What would I do? I'd have the UN be a much more serious organization. Start by stripping all dictatorships and religious theocracies from any positions of power and allow only free democracies to have a full say in what the UN does.
post #22 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
What would I do? I'd have the UN be a much more serious organization. Start by stripping all dictatorships and religious theocracies from any positions of power and allow only free democracies to have a full say in what the UN does.

So, you advocate removing the sovereignty clause from the UN charter. You know the one that says nations have a right to choose their form of leadership be it monarchy, constitutional monarchy, democratically elected leaders or dictator.

You alluded to the answer, what would you do with Sudan. Would you attack, or sanction. Simply removing noncooperative states from the UN body would effect little to no change.
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #23 of 70
It wouldn't effect the wording and intent of sanctions one bit? 'kay...
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #24 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
What would I do? I'd have the UN be a much more serious organization. Start by stripping all dictatorships and religious theocracies from any positions of power and allow only free democracies to have a full say in what the UN does.

HAHA

I take it that you meant strip them of power within the UN . . .
or, did you mean that you would you set up a 'Nation Governement Police' and decide who can govern whom, and how?
And who would be the dictator there?

But of course I'm sure you didn't mean that . . . . at least not overtly.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #25 of 70
Maybe this is a "What would France do?" moment? (anybody got a funny France pic? )
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #26 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
What would I do? I'd have the UN be a much more serious organization. Start by stripping all dictatorships and religious theocracies from any positions of power and allow only free democracies to have a full say in what the UN does.

How would that help the Sudan?
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #27 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
allow only free democracies to have a full say in what the UN does.

Are you including the US in there as a "free democracy"?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #28 of 70
...and here's where the topic is lead astray...
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #29 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
...and here's where the topic is lead astray...

Astray from what? No one even knows what the hell Scott's point was/is. UN might threaten sanctions on Sudan and Scott either thinks it's stupid or is a good thing and won't say anything other than the equivalent "The UN sucks."
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #30 of 70
He certainly didn't start the topic to discuss if the US is really a free democracy or not...but detours like this are par for the course, really.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #31 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
He certainly didn't start the topic to discuss if the US is really a free democracy or not...but detours like this are par for the course, really.

Scott can ignore that post and respond to the ones that directly address the thread. Or, as I suspect, he'll shy away from any thread that begins to prove him wrong.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #32 of 70
Yes, let us all concentrate on disregarding that dubiously planted post.

As for the foreshadowing bit in your post, I don't think that is particularly conducive toward any kind of useful discussion. As such, it is similarly superfluous as the aforementioned post derailment.
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #33 of 70
Independent on one's opinion of the UN, I think they need to be more involved with Sudan. This is a major issue that should be addressed immediately.

I don't think that we alone should immediately send troops to the Sudan, but the US could damn well champion a plan to resolve the issue. At the very least it could force this issue in the UN.

Unfortunately the current administration has already shown the UN what it thinks of it and I doubt Bush will help either situation at all.
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #34 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Yes, let us all concentrate on disregarding that dubiously planted post.

As for the foreshadowing bit in your post, I don't think that is particularly conducive toward any kind of useful discussion. As such, it is similarly superfluous as the aforementioned post derailment.

For someone who's complaining about a post derailing a thread, you're doing a mighty fine job of it. You're the ONLY person talking about it.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #35 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Yes, let us all concentrate on disregarding that dubiously planted post.

As for the foreshadowing bit in your post, I don't think that is particularly conducive toward any kind of useful discussion. As such, it is similarly superfluous as the aforementioned post derailment.

Christ, what do you want? You claim a single post derails the thread, then get sarcastic about how we haven't focused on it.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #36 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by addabox
Christ, what do you want? You claim a single post derails the thread, then get sarcastic about how we haven't focused on it.

And then derails the thread by complaining that it's been derailed.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #37 of 70
Yes, it was all me. I guess somebody's got to shunt your chicanery. Now please shut your yap, already. 8)
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #38 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Yes, it was all me. I guess somebody's got to shunt your chicanery. Now please shut your yap, already. 8)

I'll put us back on track:

What would you do Randy? Would you commit forces or enact sanctions?
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
"[Saddam's] a bad guy. He's a terrible guy and he should go. But I don't think it's worth 800 troops dead, 4500 wounded -- some of them terribly -- $200 billion of our treasury and counting, and...
Reply
post #39 of 70
Why I'm all for the UN doing as they see fit (thought that was clear already).
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
Lauren Sanchez? That kinda hotness is just plain unnatural.
Reply
post #40 of 70
Quote:
Originally posted by Randycat99
Yes, it was all me. I guess somebody's got to shunt your chicanery. Now please shut your yap, already. 8)

I'm sorry, it's going to take me a little while to get past the notion of having ones chicanery shunted. If, in fact, I ever can.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › UN might threaten sanctions on Sudan