Rwanda Massacre : Why did UN and retreat and further discuss

BTW might I point out that the UN is not a country.
The UN is made up of every nation on the planet.
THAT INCLUDES AMERICA!
So by insulting it you insult yourselves.
:D
HE HE!
The UN also is made up of forign troops and countries do not wish thier troops to be hurt so they may give troops orders to avoid fire fights.
Just a little thought.
 
devilwasp said:
BTW might I point out that the UN is not a country.
The UN is made up of every nation on the planet.
THAT INCLUDES AMERICA!
So by insulting it you insult yourselves.
:D
HE HE!
The UN also is made up of forign troops and countries do not wish thier troops to be hurt so they may give troops orders to avoid fire fights.
Just a little thought.
Click to expand...

I am quite aware of what the United Nations is. It is a multi national organization. By being a member of the UN however no Country gives up their rights of self direction nor self goverment in hommage to the UN.

I also have a better than average understanding of how the UN Peace Keeping forces are commanded . ROE's are set by the UN not the nations composing the force.
 
03USMC said:
I am quite aware of what the United Nations is. It is a multi national organization. By being a member of the UN however no Country gives up their rights of self direction nor self goverment in hommage to the UN.
Click to expand...
No but you do realise you insult yourself?
Your country made it , your country is part of it so you are insulting your own country. :D
I also have a better than average understanding of how the UN Peace Keeping forces are commanded . ROE's are set by the UN not the nations composing the force.
Click to expand...
Yeah and who sets the ROE's?
You say the UN but who does?
 
One more time youngin. The UN sets the ROE's within the mission statement. The Commander of the UN forces whatever nation he may hail from implements them.

And insulting my self let me look outside . Yeah okay it's still the stars and stripes. Not a UN banner.
 
devilwasp said:
Yeah and who sets the ROE's?
You say the UN but who does?
Click to expand...

Technically the secruity council; and the UN Beurocracy itself. The end result is that the ROE's water down the effectivness of troops. Not being able to react to anything over then "effective" fire for example.
 
03USMC said:
One more time youngin. The UN sets the ROE's within the mission statement. The Commander of the UN forces whatever nation he may hail from implements them.
Click to expand...
I know the orginisation does it but who in the organisation?
Actually that would be suicide because many diffrent situtation require diffrent ROE's so it must be someone who is totaly informed about the operation...am i wrong?
And insulting my self let me look outside . Yeah okay it's still the stars and stripes. Not a UN banner.
Click to expand...
A stars and stripes is part of it, unless ofcourse your treaties and promises dont mean anything?
 
r031Button said:
Technically the secruity council; and the UN Beurocracy itself. The end result is that the ROE's water down the effectivness of troops. Not being able to react to anything over then "effective" fire for example.
Click to expand...
So now your saying there should be no ROE's if it waters down the effectiveness?
Wasnt that in WW2 now was it? You guys hated the tactics the japs used.
The security coucnil technically sets inetantional ones BUT its the local comanders that choose the real ones.
 
The Bureaucrats that sit on the UNSC dictate rules of engagement. Not the Military Members of the force. And there in lies the rub. People who have not a clue about combat dictating ROE's. They are more concerned about appearing PC, and benevolent.

What treaties?
 
03USMC said:
The Bureaucrats that sit on the UNSC dictate rules of engagement. Not the Military Members of the force. And there in lies the rub. People who have not a clue about combat dictating ROE's. They are more concerned about appearing PC, and benevolent.

What treaties?
Click to expand...
When you joined the UN , you made a treaty to help uphold peace.
Actually most members of parlament are ex military, hell even the former leader of the liberal dems was ex SBS.
 
Are referring to Britians Parliment?

And yes the US does deploy forces in support of the UN. At our pleasure just as every other Nation does. At their Pleasure.
 
03USMC said:
Are referring to Britians Parliment?

And yes the US does deploy forces in support of the UN. At our pleasure just as every other Nation does. At their Pleasure.
Click to expand...
You made a promies, now you say you can break it?
No just polititions in general.
 
No. There is nothing in the UN charter that requires any member nation to provide troops on demand to the UN. Member Nations may at their discretion provide troops as they see fit.
 
03USMC said:
No. There is nothing in the UN charter that requires any member nation to provide troops on demand to the UN. Member Nations may at their discretion provide troops as they see fit.
Click to expand...
Who was talking about troops, you dont always need troops to keep world peace.
 
03USMC said:
So pray tell what are you refering too?
Click to expand...
You said that polititions water down the ROE's but i was saying how most polititions are ex-military and therefore know what the ROE's should be.
Also i am saying how america made a promise to keep the world safe yet you insult it and yourself by calling it useless therefore calling yourself stupid.
 
Well excuse me if I don't share your high opinion of the UN. If that makes me stupid so be it. And please excuse my opinion that no Nations Military should be at the beck and call of a psuedo World Goverment.
 
03USMC said:
Well excuse me if I don't share your high opinion of the UN. If that makes me stupid so be it. And please excuse my opinion that no Nations Military should be at the beck and call of a psuedo World Goverment.
Click to expand...
I dont see it as a world government , i see it as someone trying to organise the help of the world and stop another WW1 two armed camps situation.
Hey its your opinion.
 
The UN has steadily lost it's influence over the past 20 years to where it's at today - a toothless tiger that huffs and puffs when real action is required. It needs to be completely overhauled to make it viable. What happened in Rwanda was a disgrace really and too often the UN seems to pander to politics.

The UN is too busy trying to be all things to all men. This will never happen.
 
Doppleganger said:
The UN has steadily lost it's influence over the past 20 years to where it's at today - a toothless tiger that huffs and puffs when real action is required. It needs to be completely overhauled to make it viable. What happened in Rwanda was a disgrace really and too often the UN seems to pander to politics.
Click to expand...
Yeah it has lost its touch, it really wasnt meant to be a tiger anyway.
The UN is too busy trying to be all things to all men. This will never happen.
Click to expand...
People will try anything for peace, even if that means working with the devil.
 
Big_Z said:
Because America wasn't under attack by Africans........... We have no obligation to help every single country that has problems. America isn't here to hold the hand of every country on the planet, thats what the UN is for and they obviously cant handle it. Why didnt Malaysia or Serbia send troops to help?
Click to expand...

Did Iraqi attack American? Bush himselfs says he wants world peace so he declared 2 wars. Today USA r the world police plz. The American do not have obligation to help every single country, and THEY ALSO HAVE NO RIGHT TO LAUNCH MILITARY INVASION STUBBORNLY WITHOUT TAKING UN ADVICE.

Secondly, if USA just attack like that as what u say. USA reaction is like doing revenge action, is this right? Especially they cannot prove Iraq did something harmful and they were seems ton be innocent from 911.

Malaysia send the their soldiers to join the UN military service for many kinds of activities. Like Bosnia conflict. We r a small country and we r not like Bush who look down at the authority of UN. All the Nations should take UN in the first place, I don't think American did.

Basically the whole incident is -- There comes to an obligation to American when a certain middle east country holding oil procution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top