SHOULD.. indeed COULD the U.N. wait until a white flag is flown before going into the theatre with aid?

Question

Indeed, according to the UN website -
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=25084&Cr=afghan&Cr1=
At the end of 2007, humanitarian actors in Afghanistan are operating under much tighter security restrictions – the inevitable consequence of insecurity on the ground – Charlie Higgins of the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) said at a press briefing in Kabul today.

“These restrictions curtail our access to communities for humanitarian purposes, whether this is the delivery of relief, or efforts to protect civilians from direct harm during conflict,” stated Mr. Higgins, who heads UNAMA’s humanitarian unit.

Mr. Higgins stressed “an unacceptably high risk” to agencies that carry humanitarian deliveries along the main routes in southern and western Afghanistan, as evidenced by a recent attack on a UN World Food Programme (WFP) truck carrying 15 tons of biscuits. The vehicle was looted and then burned, and the driver killed" UNQUOTE
I won't dwell on recent news.

Answer 1

No.

No action is without risk. Those that take part in providing aid should be made aware of the risks before they take part in providing aid, and ideally, should be paid for the risk. Not only that, where appropriate they should be given protection, and more importantly, the rights to defend themselves.

While the UN has failed the people of Bosnia, Iraq and Rwanda but its inaction due to its obsession with diplomacy, it has done much good in the world in many many other places.

Answer 2

One of the things that is appropriate is for UN to actually wake up and actually asess the reality of their operation.

UN is pretty much pissing in the wind when it comes to a lot of cases and public has come to realise it a long time ago.

A lot of rogue states look at UN as a minor deterence rather than something to reckon with. Point is that UN has lost its face a long time ago.

The aid we try to send to the needing countries - we the public are aware through their own records - that only 1-5% of our aid is getting to the people in need. The rest is tolen by the corrupt regimes that we are trying to help out.

People are sick and tired of UN mandate and the bullcrap that goes with it. Times are changing and people are finally realising that UN is all about talk and is not about action.
Why do you think people are hesitant about donating these days??

People are tired of crap and lies, and corruption in the UN themselves as well as the countries we are trying to fix.

We are pissing in the wind and are wasting our time. Charity starts at home!! We have enough issues in our countries without having to waste out time and money sending money where it will make no difference.

Answer 3

The UN is a debate forum and a venue for delivering aid to destitute people nothing more. If you (or anybody else on Earth) are going to wait for the UN to take decisive action somewhere, don't commit suicide by holding your breath while waiting.

Answer 4

What does the one world government AKA The U.N. care about anyways aside from their money that comes from their buddies in The Tri Lateral Commission?!!

They could care less about their fellow man when it comes to money! And who is one of the biggest, if not the biggest contributor to the U.N. We the people! The American tax payer that pays for the "special interest groups" that our politicians claim to be funded by, that's who!
And who are these special interest groups? Corporate America! And who runs most of corporate America? The Tri Lateral Commission. They even run OPEC!
To give it to you bluntly; the U.N. could careless about a white flag being raised-up, as long as they keep getting their money!

Answer 5

I guess they have to do what makes the most sense. And hopefullylets avoid another debacle like the oil for food program in Iraq that was lining peoples pockets and not getting food to the people anyway.

Answer 6

The UN flag should be a yellow flag as they are...well i'd get

another violation!