4 ms·

UN issues warning to US authorities to stand down against rioters

• mark_l_watson 6y ago
  Interesting story. I haven’t seen that in the US news yet.
• 0xy 6y ago
  The UN fingerwags countries while harboring child rapist peacekeepers (who also acted as pimps of children) [1], so they have worse than zero credibility against any kind of enforcement action. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peace...
• lightgreen 6y ago
  With so many controversies about UN (WHO about masks; UN about Taiwan; Russia and China having veto; UN support for Khmer Rouge and so on and on and on), UN does not matter much. It would be better for the world if UN was disposed and replaced with something meaningful. (The article mentions “The UN called on authorities to specifically ensure federal and local police were clearly identifiable“, which would be very good, but nobody really cares about what UN says.)
  • badrabbit 6y ago
    What a silly thing to say, and who should fight that world war? You do realize the UN is the reason WW3 has been delayed for so long? The UN is not an authority over nations, it's an organization meant to facilitate diplomacy. So, instead of Europe sanctioning the US in this case, they take action in form of a meaningful yet ineffective condemnation. It succeeded in avoiding diplomatic escalation. The US is not special, extrajudicial killings happen all over the world, when was your UN replacement that will fix the world when this started in philippines in 2016? Syria? What will your replacement do, send troops? Sanction? The UN does that. Ever heard of the term belling the cat? http://read.gov/aesop/003.html http://read.gov/aesop/003.html
    • chrisco255 6y ago
      The UN is not the reason for the delay in WWIII. Mutually assured destruction is the reason for that. The US and Russia conducted proxy wars for decades in spite of the existence of the UN.
      • badrabbit 6y ago
        Not true at all, world war is not synonymous with nucleat wat between US and Russia. Regional conflicts grow and draw in super power allies, before you know it you are fighting proxy wars and those proxy wars grow to actual battles. If and when nuclear powers feel their existence is in danger, they will use nuclear force. Mutually assured destruction sounds nice in movies but in reality, it stopped the mighty japanese empire. Some look at nukes as a way to sacrifice millions to save billions. Some think even a nuke power like the US will not continue to escalate after a nuclear war because of political red tape or MAD,the US or Russia for examples might surrender and accept loss instead of riskiny a global nuclear war.
        • ta17711771 6y ago
          I'd rather have been conquered by the Japanese.
          • badrabbit 6y ago
            You never heard of the Nanjing massacre? Some say it's worse than the holocaust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre Unless you are japanese that empire will not have treated you nicely. "The man in the high castle" shows how it might have been under japanese rule. No thanks.
          • lightgreen 6y ago
            Which means that you are either an ultra pacifist against any form of violence even for self-defecnce or you did not study history well enough https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes