Comments on: NUTS & BOLT(ON) – PART II

By: Billy

Billy — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:31:00 +0000

Hey, you have a great blog here! I’m definitely going to bookmark you!
I have a card credit debt reduce tip
site/blog. It pretty much covers card credit debt reduce tip
related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time

By: Hypocrisy Thy Name منافقت ؟

Hypocrisy Thy Name منافقت ؟ — Sun, 28 Aug 2005 03:50:00 +0000

Nut and bolts are good for nothing where buds and flowers are needed. Screw them up. Wait a minute. UNDP and UNICEF, as the person from Bangladesh wrote, once upon a time were doing good job, however it all depends on the NGOs they contact.

By: the olive ream

the olive ream — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 03:26:00 +0000

I see your point Kate. The UN has not been instrumental in stopping wars and conflicts but in the hands of John Bolton (and the Neocon bunch) they will convert it into an organization that approves wars and conflicts initiated by the US and Israel. Future wars will be fought with UN stamp of approval to shut up respective governments that disagree.

By: Siddhartha

Siddhartha — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 03:13:00 +0000

I used to be MangoWala – but have changed my screen name to Siddhartha.

To Kate-A: It would be easy to dismiss the UN if you have never witnessed the good it does in poverty-stricken countries and semi-failed states where had it not been for long term policies put in place by institutions like the UN and its agencies like the UNDP and UNICEF, there would be major social catastrophes and fall-out. I come from a country (Bangladesh) where the UN has formed a fantastic symbiotic relationship with NGO organisations and have delivered fruitful initiatives year in, year out for the last 30 years. I’m not naive enough to think that the UN is without its share of failures and yes there have been astronomic abuses over the years, but all things remaining equal, you would have to hand it to the UN for doing a consistently relevant job.

As for Bolton – it seems he is another NeoCon parachuted into US-represenative role into an institution that the Bush Theocracy feels should be dictated on their terms. Paul Wolfowitz got seconded to the position of USA’s man in the World Bank, also on a similar remit to Bolton’s. All I can say is that they will fail, or at least have to accept that these institutions cannot be run on a conservative/authoritarian outlook similar whose only analogy is the way the US runs its Health Service (MediCare). Only the rich gets any real health service because they can afford it and the rest of the great unwashed can fuck off. I’m sorry, but it doesn’t work like that. If need be, the UN and the World Bank will be re-vamped and if that means without the inclusion of the USA – so be it. They really don’t contribute as much as they think they do anyway.

By: Teeth Maestro

Teeth Maestro — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 02:53:00 +0000

You have raised a very important issue, Bolton being such a hardliner is the wrong person to be heading the US issues at the UN. There is a big likeihood that it may further alienate the US from the rest of the world. The renegotiation is like a gun on your head better sign up or else…. The new draft is not just a few measly points but far more then protratyed as its been on the table for 6 months

I wonder when he will propose to change the name to United Nations of America, far better then United Nations.

By: Kate-A

Kate-A — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 02:37:00 +0000

I'm not too concerned about the UN, other than the money we waste in maintaining the illusion of the body being of use to the world. More here.

By: Shahid

Shahid — Sat, 27 Aug 2005 01:09:00 +0000

This right-wing nutter hasn’t even been permanently appointed! His appointment has not actually been approved and so he is there temporarily. Who knows how much damage this Nazi will do before he gets kicked out, if ever?

As for the Millennium development goals, what’s so preposterous is that the US actually signed up for these!