Canadian Seat on U.N. Security Council

[scribblet]

Well, should Canada get a seat on the council and if not why not - well maybe we are not anti Israeli enough for the U.N. But really. why would Ignatieff actually make a bizarre speech to the the U.N. saying that the Conservative government doesn’t deserve the Security Council spot? Well, maybe because if we don't get it, he could then rail at the gov't for not being good enough for the U.N. One has to wonder what if Iggy has any brains at all.

[waldo]

whaaa! Like... is there some need for you to create another thread... you've already posted multiple times in this previous thread:

here - have a replay:

Well Ignatieff cared enough to proclaim Canada does not deserve a seat at the UNSC. What a jerk.

independent capricorn watchdog notes:

This is a government that for four years has basically ignored the United Nations and now is suddenly showing up saying, 'Hey, put us on the council,'" Ignatieff said Monday.

"Don't mistake me. I know how important it is for Canada to get a seat on the Security Council but Canadians have to ask a tough question: Has this government earned that place? We're not convinced it has.

(independent capricorn watchdog: proudly serving the MLW community in helping to illuminate the capricious, partisan ramblings and purposeful distortions of capricorn)

[scribblet]

Thanks for the reply :lol:

[RNG]

There is no way in the world that Canada should get a seat. Even more importantly there is no way in the world that Canada should try and get a seat. The UN is corrupt. Totally corrupt. The UN panders to Bongo-Bongo Land. Supporting the UN is counterproductive to the betterment of mankind.

[Bonam]

There is no way in the world that Canada should get a seat. Even more importantly there is no way in the world that Canada should try and get a seat. The UN is corrupt. Totally corrupt. The UN panders to Bongo-Bongo Land. Supporting the UN is counterproductive to the betterment of mankind.

The UN is messed up, true. That being said, Canada has held the seat several times (roughly once every 10 years) and very likely will again in the near future.

[Slim]

While Iggy's motives are likely purely political (and a wee bit dishonest, yes?) I do not necessarily disagree with him.

Canada hasn't really shown the leadership I would expect on the world stage to deserve a slot on the UNSC. But the question should be asked: do we really want it? There are plenty of other ways we can make a difference on the world stage, especially in the UN.

Supporting the UN is counterproductive to the betterment of mankind.

I strongly, strongly disagree with that. The United Nations does have issues, but if you expect an organization like that to be without fault, you're dreaming.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I would rather see this nation through its arms in the air and withdraw from organizations that do not serve the best interests of the citizens. If the UN is corrupt, then we should be saying so and working toward a resolution, if that can't happen then we should remove ourselves. That applies across the board to things like NAFTA and the WTO as well as NATO and the UN.

[Argus]

While Iggy's motives are likely purely political (and a wee bit dishonest, yes?) I do not necessarily disagree with him

It's very easy to tell Iggy's position on any given issue. If the government is in favour, he is opposed. If the government is opposed, he is in favour. It's really that basic. I think if you asked him whether it was a nice day he'd first want to find out what the Tories said, so he could say the opposite.

Canada hasn't really shown the leadership I would expect on the world stage to deserve a slot on the UNSC.

As opposed to whom? Please let me know what you think of the insightful wisdom of the leadership demonstrated by Gabon, Uganda and Bosnia, Mexico, Austria, and Lebanon.

[capricorn]

Portugal has declared its support for Canada in the race for a pair of seats on the United Nations Security Council -- despite seeking one of those seats itself in the three-way race with Germany.

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Portugal+backs+Canada/3647246/story.html#ixzz11s1QrgMA

I wonder what Ignatieff thinks of this turn of events. Not exactly a development he had hoped for I'm sure.

[Slim]

It's very easy to tell Iggy's position on any given issue. If the government is in favour, he is opposed. If the government is opposed, he is in favour. It's really that basic. I think if you asked him whether it was a nice day he'd first want to find out what the Tories said, so he could say the opposite.

Unfortunately, you are correct. And that rings true for most politicians. Which is just lovely, ain't it?

As opposed to whom? Please let me know what you think of the insightful wisdom of the leadership demonstrated by Gabon, Uganda and Bosnia, Mexico, Austria, and Lebanon.

I didn't mention anything about those nations. I'm simply speaking in terms of Canada.

[waldo]

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Portugal+backs+Canada/3647246/story.html#ixzz11s1QrgMA

I wonder what Ignatieff thinks of this turn of events. Not exactly a development he had hoped for I'm sure.

Well Ignatieff cared enough to proclaim Canada does not deserve a seat at the UNSC. What a jerk.

independent capricorn watchdog notes:

This is a government that for four years has basically ignored the United Nations and now is suddenly showing up saying, 'Hey, put us on the council,'" Ignatieff said Monday.

"Don't mistake me. I know how important it is for Canada to get a seat on the Security Council but Canadians have to ask a tough question: Has this government earned that place? We're not convinced it has.

(independent capricorn watchdog: proudly serving the MLW community in helping to illuminate the capricious, partisan ramblings and purposeful distortions of capricorn)

[waldo]

There is no way in the world that Canada should get a seat. Even more importantly there is no way in the world that Canada should try and get a seat. The UN is corrupt. Totally corrupt. The UN panders to Bongo-Bongo Land. Supporting the UN is counterproductive to the betterment of mankind.

Bongo-Bongo Land? Counterproductive to the betterment of mankind!

Hee Haw! MLW hasn't had a good UN bashing thread for a while... let the Neanderthal, knuckle-dragging, rogue nation advocates revel!

[Keepitsimple]

Waldo.....I noticed that you've come out with a flurry of posts again.....you're still on IGNORE by the way......but the forum tells me that you've posted - I have the choice to view them - quite empowering. I couldn't recall EVER seeing you raise a topic of your own so I took a peek at your profile and sure enough, while you've been a busy little beaver posting your hubristic comments at a commendable rate, you've NEVER ONCE raised a topic of your own. Why is that Waldo? Rejection issues?

[waldo]

Simple ton... in order to read this you'll need to decloak!

of course, as has been the repeated pattern, each and every time you highlight you have me on ignore, I come back with my scripted response acknowledging you pulled the ignore switch over your heated meltdown related to me challenging you over your want to resurrect the 'abortion debate' in Canada... that your were advocating the need to legislate morality. Uhhh... I believe my challenging your avowed AGW climate change denial might also have something to do with it - hey? As a part of my scripted response I will also highlight the numerous times you've felt a burning need to update my posts... even though, supposedly, you claim to have me on ignore (so much for your described empowerment)

[capricorn]

I couldn't recall EVER seeing you raise a topic of your own so I took a peek at your profile and sure enough, while you've been a busy little beaver posting your hubristic comments at a commendable rate, you've NEVER ONCE raised a topic of your own. Why is that Waldo?

Another curious thing is that waldo usually logs on as anonymous. It reminds me of a predator animal lurking in the bushes waiting to pounce on a prey. Just like now.

[waldo]

Another curious thing is that waldo usually logs on as anonymous. It reminds me of a predator animal lurking in the bushes waiting to pounce on a prey. Just like now.

it is touching to realize I have such a following... although with this revelation you have touched a nerve. On behalf of all of us deciding to use this MLW provided feature, we should not have to rationalize the use given it's expediency in allowing us to better manage our multiple id's.

[Keepitsimple]

Another curious thing is that waldo usually logs on as anonymous. It reminds me of a predator animal lurking in the bushes waiting to pounce on a prey. Just like now.

Capricorn....let me know if Waldo ever answers the question that I raised......why he has never, ever raised a topic of his own. He certainly is one of a kind....and for that he can be quite proud.

[Slim]

Even though waldo can be a tad aggressive at times, he nevertheless raises good points about the issues at hand from what I've seen.

And rarely do folks actually refute his arguments. So... yeah, bash him all you want, I suppose, but you aren't really accomplishing anything by doing so.

[scribblet]

There is no way in the world that Canada should get a seat. Even more importantly there is no way in the world that Canada should try and get a seat. The UN is corrupt. Totally corrupt. The UN panders to Bongo-Bongo Land. Supporting the UN is counterproductive to the betterment of mankind.

I tend to agree, but is it not better to be at the table and possibly be able to improve the situation?

My purpose in this was to ask about Ignatieff and why he would deliberately try to subvert the process and not want to be at the table. If we do not get the seat it will look bad for him IMP. I think it shows the blind partisanship of the Liberal party and lack of care bout Canada.

[Argus]

I didn't mention anything about those nations. I'm simply speaking in terms of Canada.

You cannot assert that Canada does not "deserve" to be on a body populated by other nations without commenting on the qualifications of those other nations. The above are all on the present security council. How is Canada not fit to walk in their footsteps?

[Slim]

You cannot assert that Canada does not "deserve" to be on a body populated by other nations without commenting on the qualifications of those other nations. The above are all on the present security council. How is Canada not fit to walk in their footsteps?

Sure I can! I just did!

Joking aside, I'm very well aware that those nations on the temporary security council currently. And I'm not really using them as a yardstick to judge. If I was to compare our suitability for UNSC to another nation, I would pick ones on the permanent council. They have the political, military, and economic clout for the job (of course that's why they're there, too).

I should have probably reworded my previous statement anyway. It's not that I think Canada is some second-rate backwards state, or 'worse' than the nations you mentioned, nor that they have earned or deserve the right to a spot on the council over us. It's just that I can't see a whole lot of reason for us to be a member of the UNSC (beyond the involvement with peacekeeping, but we don't need to be on the council to participate in missions).

Does that sorta make sense?

[Argus]

I should have probably reworded my previous statement anyway. It's not that I think Canada is some second-rate backwards state, or 'worse' than the nations you mentioned, nor that they have earned or deserve the right to a spot on the council over us. It's just that I can't see a whole lot of reason for us to be a member of the UNSC (beyond the involvement with peacekeeping, but we don't need to be on the council to participate in missions).

Does that sorta make sense?

Yes, it makes considerably more sense. I don't personally consider a spot on the security council to be of any real importance, to be honest. Virtually every vote depends on the permanent members who have vetos, and even they aren't really the right members for the job. If you wanted representation you'd have the US, Russia, China, India, South Africa and Egypt as the permanent members. Still, the SC is there, and it is probably better to be a member than to not be. It does convey some slight measure of influence and importance, so why not? I wouldn't put a lot of effort into gaining it but I would never go so far as to suggest we weren't as worthy as any other nation on the temporary part of the council. We certainly hold more to the ideals of the UN than most of them.

[capricorn]

Still, the SC is there, and it is probably better to be a member than to not be.

I would imagine it's one way of being privy to some very interesting information. It beats spying.

[Slim]

Yeah but nobody makes movies about UNSC meetings. Spying is so much sexier. Especially if you're Valerie Plame.

Mmmm...

[RNG]

The UN is an impotent, corrupt bastardly accummulation of Banana Republics that make a joke of the real world. Who cares? That Canada is trying to get some sort of recognition in that pitiful cesspool is very, very sad.