2007-02-01 00:35:07 · 9 answers · asked by Saint_Cle_ho 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
oope? i don't want to answer this question as it causes violation.
2007-02-01 00:40:27 · answer #1 · answered by robert KS LEE. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN is still officially at war with North Korea- the current lack of combat is only a ceasefire (albeit long)
Best way to handle this conflict? Finish the bl.....y war, liberate North Korea and execute the Kim dictator and his cronies.
Iran? No conflict so far that I can see at present, unless you count the Iranian support of terrorism in Lebanon and Iraq.
Best way to handle the situation? The same way the UN handled the insurgency in Katanga- send in troops and arrest the members of the corrupt, illegal and murderous mullah regime. Then hold free elections- really free and not the farce the mullahs organise from time to time.
2007-02-01 00:53:12 · answer #2 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To start, by NOT characterizing this as a conflict between NK and Iran v the US. It is not. It is two terrorist nations threatening a third country. The US is not sneaking around plotting military action against THEM. THEY are acting out against the world community, and picking on the big prominent nation. That's all. You cannot characterize this as some sort of pissing contest between countries, because the US isn't IN contest with them. It just doesn't want to get nuked one night. Which is reasonable. Why does the rest of the world sit on its hands and allow this acting out by these rogue nations? THAT is the question. That it's the US is only cause the US is the big prominent currently - if it were UK or Canada or Brazil that was on center stage, it would be them these ppl were menacing.
2007-02-01 00:41:36 · answer #3 · answered by All hat 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The United Nations couldn't handle its own ---- let alone any kind of serious political or international situation. They are too busy finding ways to fill their pockets with cash from all the aid programs while they draft the next resolution condemning the USA and Israel for defending the issues they would not have to defend if the ----ing UN was doing what it was supposed to do.
2007-02-01 00:46:45 · answer #4 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Getting out of the way would be most beneficial, as their history on handling conflicts speaks for it's self
2007-02-01 00:56:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The UN could not handle getting a puppy out of a wet paper bag...the UN passes sanctions, but no one really abides by them...so the UN is a useless organization...
2007-02-01 00:41:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hard question. I don't really know. Maybe you can tell us. I think that why there are the people that have the jobs, and I don't have their job.
2007-02-01 00:43:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They should call a special session to condemn Israel for, well, whatever it is they condemn Israel for.
2007-02-01 01:45:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm in Iran, PLEASE don't attack us!! I'm only 15!
2007-02-01 02:45:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋