Quote:
|
Al, spare us yet another Chavez hagiography. this one is of stomach churning proportions.
anyway, i see no reason for excluding venezuela if they can demonstrate fair electoral processes, and if they cease to assist really despotic regimes and terrorist outfits.
|
How about funding movements designed to violently overthrow democratically elected governments? Would they be barred if they did that? I'd assume not or the US wouldn't be allowed because of their actions in, funnily enough, Venezuela.
Quote:
|
the UN is in large part composed of dictatorships.
|
Really? That's interesting. Can you provide a list please of which countries you think are dictatorships and why please. There're 192 countries in it, so a simple majority of 93 will be ample. I'm sure with your informed view which you are so stridently proclaiming here you should have no problem with that.
Quote:
|
the peacekeepers are a joke that's part of the problem. they're better at running prostitution rackets than intervening to help anyone.
|
Really? So the peacekeepers who were allowed to take the action they felt most appropriate were useless. What were the limits on their actions that caused them to be useless do you think? Couldn't possibly be the limits put on by several countries who've agreed to send them could it?
What's your wonderful idea to replace them after the end of the UN btw? UK & US troops populating every trouble spot in the world? They can't handle two pretty small countries in the middle east and subcontinent of India ffs!
Quote:
|
i don't think it's pointless. there's much to be said for admitting where you've been wrong.
|
From Fukuyamas point of view, yes I agree. From someone arguing a point against it? Feck off.
Fukuyama has always been wrong before his books went out of print. The self-indulgent arsehole goes out of date quicker than organic milk. The man is to prediction and reading trends as Prince Philip is to tact. He's an arsehole.