NK gave them the political finger

[B. Max]

It will be interesting to see what NK does next.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...3543.shtml?s=lh

[jbg]

It will be interesting to see what NK does next.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...3543.shtml?s=lh

This episode illustrates why the UN should be abolished. We should have been at the barracks, not at the UN drafting papers. NK does not care what any paper says.

[B. Max]

I agree the UN has been an enabler of all sorts of bad behavior.

[August1991]

What will North Korea do next? In the face of a UN sanction?

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Saturday to impose strict sanctions on North Korea for its reported nuclear test, overcoming objections from Russia and China by explicitly excluding the threat of military force.

The resolution, drafted by the United States, clears the way for the toughest international action against North Korea since the end of the Korean War.

...

Less than an hour after joining in the Council vote to approve the resolution, the Chinese ambassador, Wang Guangya, said that China would not participate in the inspection regime because it would create "conflict that could have serious implications for the region."

NYT

This UN resolution is irrelevant and everyone knows it.

I think we should name Saddam Hussein Sec-Gen and make North Korea a permanent member of the Security Council.

The Academy Awards are still relevant but the UN is not. The UN will soon enter Dan Rather or even Pee-Wee Herman territory. Some people once paid attention to the announcements of the Board of Directors of Enron. Well, some people still pay attention to the resolutions of the UN. Public personalities come and go, and public institutions also.

[jbg]

Well, some people still pay attention to the resolutions of the UN. Public personalities come and go, and public institutions also.

I resent their propensity for not paying parking tickets, and local creditors, in New York City. Total low lifes.

[B. Max]

Ok, but what might they do. I don't think they'll sit still.

Will they test fire some more missiles, and who's direction would they aim them. I can't see them aiming towards Japan lest they decide that this is to much and build their own nukes. They might, if they get the bugs out their long range missiles aim one towards the US. After all that's who they want to send a message to and the US already has nukes. Will they try another nuke test. Or will they try something all together different.

[Remiel]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/st...1922445,00.html

[sharkman]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/st...1922445,00.html

Good to see a bank that is laundering and counterfitting money doesn't get away with it. Kim Jong has to learn that if you want to have commerce with the rest of the world, you have to play by the rules.

[jdobbin]

The U.S. has never wanted an effective U.N. anyways. They see it, like all permanent members of the Security Council, as a curb on their power.

The U.N. cannot do anything about North Korea but then neither can the U.S. unless it is prepared to go to war. I don't think they have the stomach for it. It would either require tactical nuclear strikes or instituting a draft because that is what would be required to liberate North Korea from a military that has numbers not seen World War II.

And then there is the China factor. If the U.S. did invade, China has a propensity for getting involved in any conflict that nears its borders. They might not like North Korea right now but they would and could possibly be up for a fight over it.

[mcqueen625]

It will be interesting to see what NK does next.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...3543.shtml?s=lh

This episode illustrates why the UN should be abolished. We should have been at the barracks, not at the UN drafting papers. NK does not care what any paper says.

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- The U.N. Security Council unanimously approved tough sanctions against North Korea for its claimed nuclear test, but divisions over how to enforce them signaled that implemenation may not be easy.

One of the biggest differences was over a call on countries to inspect cargo leaving and arriving in North Korea to prevent any illegal trafficking in unconventional weapons or ballistic missiles.

The final resolution was softened from language authorizing searches, but was still unacceptable to China -- the North's closest ally and largest trading partner -- which said it would not carry out any searches.

This article illistrates how useless the U.N. really is, and should be abolished forthwith. It has become a toothless tiger, an organization who's time is past. It is an organization that started out with the right idea, but allowed undemocratic countries like China, North Korea, Cuba, and other third world dictatorships into the fold. This is an organization that now has absolutely no power nor will to police the world to ensure that another world war cannot happen. If anything, with the U.N. in charge we are more likely to end up in a large scale war. This is an organization who talks and procrastinates rather than acts, largely due to countries like China, France & Russia who all have a penchant for doing business with rogue states like Iraq, Iran, Northt Korea, China, and the thing that really makes the U.N. redundant is the fact that France, Russia and China have been given vito power over any actions that may be taken to enforce U.N. decisions. This is an organization full of appointed bureaucrats who are held to no accountability. For this organization to work the way it was supposed to, these individuals need to be elected through some type of international election process, and any nation that is not a democracy should be precluded from joining. Further any nation who bceases to be a democracy such as Venezuela should lose their membership until they once again become a democracy. This would ensure that countries like China, Iran, North Korea would never become member states let alone have a veto power at the Security Council table.

[Riverwind]

This UN resolution is irrelevant and everyone knows it.

The UN provides a place for competing views to be heard and discussed. The fact that it never reaches consensus on any issue of importance simply reflects the nature of the divided and polarized world we live in. The UN serves the purpose for which it was created - the biggest problem with the UN today is too many people seem to think that it should be more than a talking shop.

[Figleaf]

1. The UN is nothung more or less than what the member states make of it. Criticizing it in isolation of the members is ludicrous, and demonstrates either ideological bias, ignorance of international affairs, or both.

2. Hypocrisy is clearly rampant among security council members. Why should Pakistan be allowed to have nukes and not NK? NK is not violating any treaty or laws in seeking or having its nukes.

[jdobbin]

1. The UN is nothung more or less than what the member states make of it. Criticizing it in isolation of the members is ludicrous, and demonstrates either ideological bias, ignorance of international affairs, or both.

2. Hypocrisy is clearly rampant among security council members. Why should Pakistan be allowed to have nukes and not NK? NK is not violating any treaty or laws in seeking or having its nukes.

Exactly. The U.S. bashes the U.N and does everything in its power to undermine it.

Every country that gets nuclear weapons tries to prevent anyone else from having them.

[Argus]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/st...1922445,00.html

So what? North Korea is a ridiculously rogue regime. They have been counterfeting American currency for years, and have so perfected the art that the bills can only be recognized as forgeries by the US Treasury department iself. Why would the US not move to halt something like that? Are you suggesting they should be allowed to flout international law because they're - well, basically insane?

[bradco]

It will be interesting to see what NK does next.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2...3543.shtml?s=lh

This episode illustrates why the UN should be abolished. We should have been at the barracks, not at the UN drafting papers. NK does not care what any paper says.

Im glad people who are in charge are not so quick to go to war as you. Are you completely oblivious to the fact he has a nuclear weapon now. Although he isnt capable of firing it off anywhere Seoul would be gone if world leaders followed your advice to go straight to the barracks. For the sake of the millions of peopleliving in Seoul Im glad your not in charge

This article illistrates how useless the U.N. really is, and should be abolished forthwith. It has become a toothless tiger, an organization who's time is past.

Blame its members for that. When they cooperate and wish for the UN to be effective it is.

This is an organization that now has absolutely no power nor will to police the world to ensure that another world war cannot happen.

What the UN always needed was a permanent army. Unfortunatly no states were willing to provide for it. Its ability to police the world is therefore dependant on the willingness of states to provide resources. Any failure to rpevent a world war will be a result of this unwillingness. I would argue it is much morelikely that a world war would result without the UN. You take out the one place where all antions can get together and talk about their differences instead of settling them on the battlefield.

the U.N. redundant is the fact that France, Russia and China have been given vito power over any actions that may be taken to enforce U.N. decisions.

Your blatant bias is evident here as you dont mention the US. The US is second all time in vetoing resolutions well ahead of the rest of the pack including France, UK and China.

Although I agree with you that they ought to all be democracies that is against the purpose of the UN. The UN is supposed to be inclusive of all nations, not just ones that the West likes. That is, the UN is an international organization not an exclusively western one. Dont confuse NATO and the UN. Now if the people in these non democratic countries were to rise up and demand democracy Id say the UN should support them. Probably couldnt happen because China would veto. Maybe we should do away with the vetos then. BUt would the US, UK, France or Russia be ok with that? No. Any faults of the UN lie equally with all of the permanent members of the security council.

[Remiel]

The question is, why didn't the U.S. try to force North Korea to forfeit on their criminal activities as an additional condition of the agreement, instead of reaching an agreement and then coming down on it, blocking the North Korean access to the international banking system within days of the agreement?