At 00:41 31-10-2002 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
Also note that his previous postings on the UN suggest that he believes
non-democratic countries should not have a vote in the more-or-less
democratic UN because those countries are not democratic themselves.
Actually, I have never stated this. I
At 01:28 31-10-2002 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
So, what do we have here? We have one hell of an inconsistency in JDG's
beliefs.
I can't help but wonder if right after the part about You must always
answer every question posed to you in Jeroen's etiquette guidelines, if
there just might not be
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: Our Friends at the UN
Which section of the report was that in?
Part 1, chapter 11
OK, I'll get there sometime next
John D. Giorgis wrote:
There's difference between giving the Cameroonians a *say*, and giving the
despot of a tiny, one-party, banana republic the decisive vote on the
morality of intervening in Iraq.
I'd support the former, but right now, we're stuck with the latter - and
find it fairly
John D. Giorgis wrote:
(edited for emphasis -- Matt G)
Wall St. Journal
Our Friends at the U.N.
Tuesday, October 29, 2002 12:01 a.m. EST
President Bush is *understandably8 losing
patience with the U.N. ... Saddam Hussein
...has made the United Nations look foolish.
... Vicente Fox has
At 11:49 PM 10/30/2002 +1100 Ray Ludenia wrote:
You don't perchance find it amusing that the US appears to be relying on the
support of this banana republic to over-ride the reservations that the other
members of the SC have about the morality of intervention?
Democracies on the UNSC:
Yes:
US,
John D. Giorgis wrote:
At 05:02 AM 10/30/2002 -0800 Matt Grimaldi wrote:
This *council of conciliation* ... [disagrees with
the term material breach] What is it, a foot fault?
... Franco-Russian-Mexican position isn't diplomacy
so much as a denial of reality.
What a load of
I found a well written article that details the negatives for going into
Iraq unilaterally. Its at
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/11/fallows.htm
Its too bad Gautam has a problem with his email server that keeps his as a
part time lurker. I'd be curious to see what he'd say about this,
At 23:49 30-10-2002 +1100, Ray Ludenia wrote:
There's difference between giving the Cameroonians a *say*, and giving
the despot of a tiny, one-party, banana republic the decisive vote on
the morality of intervening in Iraq.
I'd support the former, but right now, we're stuck with the latter
- Original Message -
From: Matt Grimaldi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 11:46 AM
Subject: Re: Our Friends at the UN
Dan Minette wrote:
My issues of concern (which I've stated before) are:
There are moral and political problems with forcing
Dan Minette wrote:
Further, we have the unfortunate example of the Balkins. The US behaved as
just one of many members of the international community, unwilling to force
its will on the world, or even its allies. Lets look at what the Dutch
review of the tragedy in Kosova has to say about
Doug wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
I
heard from him, BTW, and he is doing fine, although he's pretty busy.
Glad to hear it. How about Zim, we haven't heard from him in quite a while.
Doug
The server is chewing up his posts. We're trying to fix the problem.
Well, Zimmy and Nick are
- Original Message -
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: Our Friends at the UN
Which section of the report was that in?
Part 1, chapter 11
Dan M.
___
http
At 10:57 PM 10/30/2002 +0100 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
So, what do we have here? We have one hell of an inconsistency in JDG's
beliefs.
I can't help but wonder if right after the part about You must always
answer every question posed to you in Jeroen's etiquette guidelines, if
there just might
At 10:57 PM 10/30/2002 +0100 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
Also note that his previous postings on the UN suggest that he believes
non-democratic countries should not have a vote in the more-or-less
democratic UN because those countries are not democratic themselves.
Actually, I have never stated
John D. Giorgis wrote:
SWING VOTES:
Ireland, Mexico, Guinea, Cameroon
Yes folks, the fate of the world may well rest in the hands of
Guinea or Cameroon, should Ireland or Mexico choose to abstain from
voting.
This kind of statement is an example of why some nations think the US is
At 10:07 PM 10/29/2002 -0500 Jim Sharkey wrote:
John D. Giorgis wrote:
SWING VOTES:
Ireland, Mexico, Guinea, Cameroon
Yes folks, the fate of the world may well rest in the hands of
Guinea or Cameroon, should Ireland or Mexico choose to abstain from
voting.
This kind of statement is an
In a message dated 10/29/2002 8:07:44 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This kind of statement is an example of why some nations think the US is
arrogant. God forbid a pathetic backwater like Cameroon have any say in what
happens in the world. It's not like they live
Jim Sharkey wrote:
John D. Giorgis wrote:
SWING VOTES:
Ireland, Mexico, Guinea, Cameroon
Yes folks, the fate of the world may well rest in the hands of
Guinea or Cameroon, should Ireland or Mexico choose to abstain from
voting.
This kind of statement is an example of why some nations
19 matches
Mail list logo
