Does the west still exist?

by Aiakon

Back to The Real World.

Verithrax2007-03-26 21:35:23
QUOTE(daganev @ Mar 26 2007, 06:21 PM) 393901
But the hate in the EU is the way they conduct themselves, and then blame all their problems on the U.S. while also asking the U.S. to solve all the international disputes.

No, that's your distorted, prejudiced, downright silly view of it.
Darfur is still going on, despite the world united opinion that it should stop, and the A.U. is getting mad at the U.S. for not using enough force there.

You mean, not using any force at all there. There is no US intervention in Darfur, only UN peacekeeping forces (Which now include the contingent of AU forces) which lack the logistic and military support to make it stop.
QUOTE
But the biggest problem with the E.U. is that they are not as good as an ally as either Japan, South Korea, or Australia.

Except, they are more or less self-sufficient in terms of a weapons industry, immensely rich, and a continental supranational entity. Non-militaristic doesn't mean militarily weak. I think the major reason the US is growing apart from Europe is simply that they don't like jumping into ridiculous wars in the Middle East because of Dubya's fancy.
Daganev2007-03-26 22:51:06
QUOTE(Verithrax @ Mar 26 2007, 02:35 PM) 393904
You mean, not using any force at all there. There is no US intervention in Darfur, only UN peacekeeping forces (Which now include the contingent of AU forces) which lack the logistic and military support to make it stop.


According to the save darfur emails I get, the U.S. had people in Sudan and were asked to remove them because of the situation in Ethopia.

Although one has to wonder about the terrible job that the UN peacekeepers always do, and the EU's instance that they always get used.
Verithrax2007-03-26 23:37:17
QUOTE(daganev @ Mar 26 2007, 07:51 PM) 393932
According to the save darfur emails I get, the U.S. had people in Sudan and were asked to remove them because of the situation in Ethopia.

Although one has to wonder about the terrible job that the UN peacekeepers always do, and the EU's instance that they always get used.

What makes you think anyone else would do a better job?
Daganev2007-03-27 00:17:42
QUOTE(Verithrax @ Mar 26 2007, 04:37 PM) 393948
What makes you think anyone else would do a better job?


History.

Virtually the exact same thing happened in Uganda/Liberia(Libya?)

I heard this from a bunch of people living in South Africa, which was later collaberated by the History channel, so I don't have all the details exactly... however...

There was a "merchant marines" who was hired by Libya or Liberia to quell a civil war and bring people to the negotiating table, after months/years of fighting and other attempts not working. The "civilian" group, which mostly consisted of ex south African army people very quickly and effectivly routed both armies/sides and scared the bejesus out of the surrounding governments. Because of this situation, the UN made a rule about not asking "civilians" to help in wars.

A few years later when Uganda broke out, the same group of "merchant marines" was asked to intervene again, however this time the U.N said no and put in their peacekeepers instead. That didn't go well, and the peace keepers had to pull out, because they couldn't handle the casualties.

Then in Bosnia/Kosovo, the UN peacekeeping troops, also were used to stop the war, however they were ineffectual as well. (When that war was over they found that one dutch group of the U.N peackeepers was actually helping "the bad guys" kill off civilians) In the end, the U.S. lead NATO group (similar to the one in Afghanistan) had to stop the fighting, and the U.N. peace keepers proved to be unable to stop the violence.

In Lebanon right now, the U.N. peace keepers who were sent and promised to stop hezubalah from gaining more missiles that can be fired on civilians, have also failed to the point that Hezbulahah now has more missiles than they did before the war started.

All in all, the U.N. peacekeeping force seems to be unable to do what they say they will due, and 9 times out of 10, it is because of the internal corruption of the U.N.

In Darfur, Sudan was able to block the U.N from putting more forces there!



Okin2007-03-27 00:17:55
QUOTE(daganev @ Mar 27 2007, 03:20 AM) 393828
I think the concept of the west is non existent these days. Or if it isn't, than it is just the wrong word.

South America, I don't think is the same as the west, for example. And I think Australia, which is definitely not "west" has more in common with the U.S and Europe, than it does with Japan or India.


Do you mean Australia is not West geographically, or not West culturally? Because I'd say Australia is as Western as the USA, UK or Canada, culturally. Australia -definitely- has far more in common with the US and Europe than Japan or India.
Daganev2007-03-27 00:18:56
QUOTE(Okin @ Mar 26 2007, 05:17 PM) 393960
Do you mean Australia is not West geographically, or not West culturally? Because I'd say Australia is as Western as the USA, UK or Canada, culturally. Australia -definitely- has far more in common with the US and Europe than Japan or India.


Geographically.
Verithrax2007-03-27 00:20:42
QUOTE(daganev @ Mar 26 2007, 09:17 PM) 393959
History.

Virtually the exact same thing happened in Uganda/Liberia(Libya?)

I heard this from a bunch of people living in South Africa, which was later collaberated by the History channel, so I don't have all the details exactly... however...

There was a "merchant marines" who was hired by Libya or Liberia to quell a civil war and bring people to the negotiating table, after months/years of fighting and other attempts not working. The "civilian" group, which mostly consisted of ex south African army people very quickly and effectivly routed both armies/sides and scared the bejesus out of the surrounding governments. Because of this situation, the UN made a rule about not asking "civilians" to help in wars.

You mean mercenaries who can't be trusted to give a damn about the Geneva convention, right?
QUOTE

A few years later when Uganda broke out, the same group of "merchant marines" was asked to intervene again, however this time the U.N said no and put in their peacekeepers instead. That didn't go well, and the peace keepers had to pull out, because they couldn't handle the casualties.
Maybe because the UN is bound by international law and simultaneously underfunded, understaffed, and targeted by local hostilities.
QUOTE

Then in Bosnia/Kosovo, the UN peacekeeping troops, also were used to stop the war, however they were ineffectual as well. (When that war was over they found that one dutch group of the U.N peackeepers was actually helping "the bad guys" kill off civilians) In the end, the U.S. lead NATO group (similar to the one in Afghanistan) had to stop the fighting, and the U.N. peace keepers proved to be unable to stop the violence.

In Lebanon right now, the U.N. peace keepers who were sent and promised to stop hezubalah from gaining more missiles that can be fired on civilians, have also failed to the point that Hezbulahah now has more missiles than they did before the war started.

All in all, the U.N. peacekeeping force seems to be unable to do what they say they will due, and 9 times out of 10, it is because of the internal corruption of the U.N.

In Darfur, Sudan was able to block the U.N from putting more forces there!

Well if they don't want help...
Unknown2007-03-27 01:00:20
The idea of "the west" was fine until the Bush administration got into office. I am embarrassed that people I know voted for him not once but twice despite his obvious derangement.
Xavius2007-03-27 01:03:06
I don't know why anyone asks with any sincerity why we think any organization would do better than the UN. I challenge you to find one project that our ol' friend Kofi successfully followed to completion. rolleyes.gif

Anyways, if you're talking about UN peacekeeping forces, the US is there, de facto. The fact that foreigners are complaining because the US hasn't sent more troops is just reinforcing my point. If it matters so much to you, train your own troops and do your own humanitarian work. Lazy bureaucratic ungrateful freeloaders.
Unknown2007-03-27 01:10:09
"Trusting in the sanity and restraint of the United States is not an option." - George Bush Jr. cry.gif People have long been in denial of how serious a problem it is that he is our leader.
Verithrax2007-03-27 03:29:42
QUOTE(Xavius @ Mar 26 2007, 10:03 PM) 393975
I don't know why anyone asks with any sincerity why we think any organization would do better than the UN. I challenge you to find one project that our ol' friend Kofi successfully followed to completion. rolleyes.gif

Ahem. Korea, VIetnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq.
QUOTE
Anyways, if you're talking about UN peacekeeping forces, the US is there, de facto. The fact that foreigners are complaining because the US hasn't sent more troops is just reinforcing my point. If it matters so much to you, train your own troops and do your own humanitarian work. Lazy bureaucratic ungrateful freeloaders.

Egotistic hypocritical imperialist pigs. I think the world is a better place when US troops stay at home and drink beer.
Xavius2007-03-27 04:03:55
QUOTE(Verithrax @ Mar 26 2007, 10:29 PM) 393998
Ahem. Korea, You're welcome. VIetnam, That worked out? Iraq, Not UN. Afghanistan, You're welcome. Iraq. That worked out? Also not UN. Also not favored by most of the US, so hey.

Egotistic hypocritical imperialist pigs. I think the world is a better place when US troops stay at home and drink beer.


Duly noted. Word will be passed on to Somalia, Bosnia, South Africa, Afghanistan...
Unknown2007-03-27 04:08:36
I haven't read the whole thread, but I would like to make a point about the UN peacekeepers. Often times they do not do a great job... however, that is not even their fault. The fact is, the UN Charter doesn't give the UN any power. They aren't authorized to use weapons (if they even have them, see Rwanda), beyond self defence, and if it comes to that they will leave.

Any global organization will be flawed because of people (read: US) wanting to keep sovreignty. It makes me sad sad.gif.