Iran's president says 'American Empire' is near collapse.

[SpiritAlight 1]

On the United Nations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

I particularly like that even the first paragraph is not respected by this and probably other countries:

"The United Nations (UN) is an international organization whose stated aims are to facilitate cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achieving world peace. The UN was founded in 1945 after World War II to replace the League of Nations, to stop wars between countries and to provide a platform for dialogue."

And the history, very much U.S.A. based:

"The UN was founded as a successor to the League of Nations, which was widely considered to have been ineffective in its role as an international governing body, as it had been unable to prevent World War II. The term "United Nations" was first used by Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt,[2] in the 1942 Declaration by United Nations, which united the Allied countries of WWII under the Atlantic Charter, and soon became a term widely used to refer to them. Declarations signed at wartime Allied conferences in 1943 espoused the idea of the UN, and in 1944, representatives of the major Allied powers met to elaborate on the plans at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference.[3] Those and later talks outlined the organization's proposed purposes, membership, organs, and ideals in regards to peace, security, and cooperation.

On 25 April 1945, the UN Conference on International Organization began in San Francisco, attended by 50 governments and a number of non-governmental organizations involved in drafting the Charter of the United Nations. The UN officially came into existence on 24 October 1945 upon ratification of the Charter by the five permanent members of the Security Council — France, the Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States — and by a majority of the other 46 signatories. The first meetings of the General Assembly, with 51 nations represented, and the Security Council, took place in London in January 1946.[4]"

The U.N. going the way of the dodo bird and of the Constitution of this country (the U.S.): disrespected and dismissed.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't know about that - I just don't think the position is very well thought through.

If you do away with the UN, you have no forum for diplomacy to deal with say, sovereignty issues, interference in another country's affairs. In short - you'd probably end up with more wars.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

I think Ahmedinejad is a dickface who needs to stfu.

Basic quals for the position of President of Iran--and candidate must be certified by the mullahs (who are a worse grade of chop---k).

[Saddle Bronc 124]

On the United Nations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

I particularly like that even the first paragraph is not respected by this and probably other countries:

The section below that, which gives the history of UN and LN is informative enough. LN was formed on Wilson's prompting in aftermath of WW1 to prevent WW2--and failed miserably.

Considering UN was built from LN's wreckage WITHOUT correcting the former's mistakes....

"The United Nations (UN) is an international organization whose stated aims are to facilitate cooperation in international law, international security, economic development, social progress, human rights, and achieving world peace. The UN was founded in 1945 after World War II to replace the League of Nations, to stop wars between countries and to provide a platform for dialogue."

And the history, very much U.S.A. based:

"The UN was founded as a successor to the League of Nations, which was widely considered to have been ineffective in its role as an international governing body, as it had been unable to prevent World War II. The term "United Nations" was first used by Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt,[2] in the 1942 Declaration by United Nations, which united the Allied countries of WWII under the Atlantic Charter, and soon became a term widely used to refer to them. Declarations signed at wartime Allied conferences in 1943 espoused the idea of the UN, and in 1944, representatives of the major Allied powers met to elaborate on the plans at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference.[3] Those and later talks outlined the organization's proposed purposes, membership, organs, and ideals in regards to peace, security, and cooperation.

On 25 April 1945, the UN Conference on International Organization began in San Francisco, attended by 50 governments and a number of non-governmental organizations involved in drafting the Charter of the United Nations. The UN officially came into existence on 24 October 1945 upon ratification of the Charter by the five permanent members of the Security Council — France, the Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States — and by a majority of the other 46 signatories. The first meetings of the General Assembly, with 51 nations represented, and the Security Council, took place in London in January 1946.[4]"

The U.N. going the way of the dodo bird....

As it should!

[IAMX 3,055]

I think Ahmedinejad is a dickface who needs to stfu.

Basic quals for the position of President of Iran--and candidate must be certified by the mullahs (who are a worse grade of chop---k).

Well, we've got good ol' Texas Boy taking his cues from corporations and religious nutcases, and Congress following in his footsteps, so guess we have quite a bit in common.

Edited September 24, 2008 by SRVT

[Peikko 1,575]

I am sure we would all love to go back to the days when 'rights' were subjectively applied. The women and children of the world will be particularly grateful for such a progressive move.

We all know what is right and what is wrong because it's all fully documented in the bible. Move over UN, we don't need you any more.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Bush has done remarkable damage to this country's reputation overseas - not least among our traditional allies. Tony Blair went into the Iraq war against massive public opposition - it basically destroyed his credibility as PM.

Its unlikely that the UK government would approve an expansion of the war on terror into Iraq, in the forseeable future anyway.

Not that McCain would be as reckless as Bush on that score...

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Bush has done remarkable damage to this country's reputation overseas - not least among our traditional allies. Tony Blair went into the Iraq war against massive public opposition - it basically destroyed his credibility as PM.

Its unlikely that the UK government would approve an expansion of the war on terror into Iraq, in the forseeable future anyway....

Eh, I've seen Brit posters state that Brown is an even worse case than Blair, so capable (mentally) of expanding WOT.

[bhajishah 4]

Where there is God Guns and Politics.. there is HOPE!!! Bring it on Achmadinejad

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Bush has done remarkable damage to this country's reputation overseas - not least among our traditional allies. Tony Blair went into the Iraq war against massive public opposition - it basically destroyed his credibility as PM.

Its unlikely that the UK government would approve an expansion of the war on terror into Iraq, in the forseeable future anyway....

Eh, I've seen Brit posters state that Brown is an even worse case than Blair, so capable (mentally) of expanding WOT.

Well Brown given that Brown inherited Blair's mantle...

Brown wasn't well liked as chancellor. Taxes went up a lot when he was running things.