We can do without the constant flow of foriegn "diplomats" that are assosiated with the UN, many of whom are simply spies, and at worst terrorists. Wouldn't it be a good thing for our national security if the UN headquarters moved to Europe?
2007-08-22 20:10:27 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Since when do we get favorable treatment in the UN?
We don't need their "business" in restaurants and hotels, NYC would be a better place for tourists without all of the bodyguards, motorcades, and assassins crowding the streets.
2007-08-22 20:23:24 · update #1
The original concept of the UN was a good one, but today it's deteriorated to little more than an ineffectual joke. Besides the astronomical cost to the U.S. to help support it, it really burns me that the foreign representatives are absolutely and without question immune to U.S. laws, from parking violations up to murder and rape.
Yes, I'd like to see them to take their act elsewhere.
2007-08-22 20:17:52 · answer #1 · answered by Chug-a-Lug 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Actually, should the US be expelled from the UN? I would rather the UN relocate on its own accord (possibly to Switzerland) rather than be mired with American interference.. Until the US gov't can learn to play nicely and allow other nations a say-so in interenational affairs, the UN will never be truly effective.
What makes you think that there are any foreign "spies" or "terrorists" posing as diplomats? Wouldn't it be a good thing if you back up your wild assumptions with credible evidence?
Also, diplomats are not immune from certain US laws when committing violent crimes on US soil. Even still, the UN Headquarters is considered international terrority Again, you provide no source to back up your claim.
2007-08-23 08:39:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Qs. Should we expel the UN from the United States?
Ans. No, we should not expel the UN from the United States because in an unipolar world with a mighty armed forced. satellite espionage system in the hands of USA whom should the USA bother or afraid of? When the world is trying to seek protection from UN against USA the same country is bringing allegations against foreign "diplomats" that are associated with the UN, as spies. There may be truth in it but who are the people responsible for giving training to them as"terrorists" or 'spies' either USA or USSR why not punish the 'Guru (Teacher)' than the .student? Is it not double standard? If Libya or Iran or Syria can be punished for harboring "terrorists" or 'spies' then why not USA and USSR should be punished for spreading terrorism and illegal occupation all over the world!
2007-08-23 12:53:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Should we expel the US from the UN might be far more reasonable. Come one, your govt has thrown your countries credibility down the toilet, you don't need any more acts of ignorant arrogance for at least 10 years. If you listened to the UN, you would not be in the Iraq conflict right now!!!!!!!!!!!!
2007-08-23 06:04:33 · answer #4 · answered by nicelyevolve 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, they're not harmful, just useless. Let's keep it that way. Putting them in charge of Iraq however can be very harmful. The oil for food scandal paid off the U.N. to keep quiet what Saddam was doing to his people. Starving them, so that he could rebuild his military. And Coffi Anon's family got paid to keep it quiet, no less.
2007-08-23 03:17:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It won't have any effect on national security -- but it would cause the UN to stop giving the US favorable treatment.
2007-08-23 03:13:25 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 8⤊ 2⤋
Get rid of them. Too bad we dont have an island nearby we can dump them to, like Cuba.
2007-08-23 03:26:44 · answer #7 · answered by Alan C 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, don't be ridiculous.
2007-08-23 03:18:37 · answer #8 · answered by Frank 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋