Because the USA does not "own" the UN, nor does it have any jurisdiction inside of the UN. Yes, the UN building is on U.S. soil, but the UN is considered owned by all countries who particpicate in the United Nations, Venezuela and Iran included. (also, Chavez was elected, not a dictator).
The simple truth is, if another world leader disagrees with the policies set forth by the United States, that leader has every right to challenge those policies verbally. Also, like it or not, there were more than just a handful of counties and diplomats in attendance at the UN when Chavez was there speaking, that shared some of the same opinions of Chavez. If Bush chooses not to participate with Chavez or any other world leader, then that's his prerogative, just the same as it is Chavez's prerogative to ask for the debate. What's wrong with that?
I think as Americans, it would be in our interest to try to understand why other nations disagree with our government's policies and seek some common point of view in order to cooperate and solve problems, not simply seeing any other country as the "bad guy" for doing so. It never hurts to enlighten one's self, not just simply letting someone else do the thinking for us.
God bless America, land of free speech.
2007-01-25 17:18:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by JasSays 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The US does not run the UN contrary to popular opinion...the only reason the UN headquarters is in New York, is the land was donated. The Land the UN occupies is considered International Territory not US soil. Much like an embassy on foreign land is considered land of the country it represents. Please pick up a book before you make remarks such as you are the one who looks like an idiot.
2007-01-25 17:07:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Cherry_Blossom 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
exciting that the entertainment industry has used the 1st modification and freedom of expression to entirely break the ethical fiber of our toddlers whilst tries to censor them could be seen as unconstitutional. The toddlers idolize their low existence techniques. Then whilst faith enters into the image, it is portrayed as tries at a spiritual take over of government and private corporation. Then got here cable television that now shows something at each time of the day. It even reasons dad and mom to ought to computer screen their childrens each and every 2d the two on television and on their desktops. Porn pops up into the quest outcomes from very harmless entries. i'm beneficial it reasons some families to grow to be dysfunctional in the process the early youngster years. Even secret abortions given to minors is against the fiber of the family contributors unit. The left blames dad and mom for his or her youngster's habit and yet they inspire it. i do no longer comprehend in the event that they are particularly communists or in the event that they are smart adequate to renowned what it particularly is. I purely call them thoroughly ignorant and a depressing help to the downfall of our u . s . a .. we ought to constantly all have thrown out our televisions whilst this all started and boycotted the theaters. we ought to blame ourselves besides.
2016-11-01 08:00:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by trevathan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The last thing we need is to let George Bush debate anybody about anything. He has no credibility and nobody like him. The U.N. has been right the whole time and if we listened to them we would not be in this situation.
2007-01-25 17:05:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by George B 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
I was tempted to give you as logical answer, but after re-reading the question and semi-rant born from misinformation and a poor attempt at political awareness, I think the only idiot in this case is the one asking: YOU
2007-01-28 01:08:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The US doesn't have anything to do with the running of the UN but if we are continually held up for ridicule then maybe we should get out. And if the US did get out of the UN the united nations would cease to exist.
2007-01-25 17:02:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
The UN is not considered to be US soil, it is international territory, belonging to all the member states.
Bush wouldn't debate because it would lend legitmacy to the guy, (he isn't great of a debater either, unless he has his earpiece with him.
2007-01-25 17:08:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Chavez won re-electon by a landslide. If they don't have a problem with him, neither should you.
2007-01-25 17:19:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by bettysdad 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Chavez has my support in many ways
2007-01-25 17:02:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by Paul I 4
·
1⤊
2⤋