Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
The UN: Bringing Peace and Stability to a Troubled World
Posted by: Dale Franks on Wednesday, May 23, 2007

United Nations peacekeepers. The Blue Helmets. They're always on the job. Although, what that job is sometimes seems to be a matter of interetation.
Pakistani U.N. peacekeepers charged with disarming Congolese militia instead engaged in gold and weapons trafficking with militia members, the British Broadcasting Corp. reported.

The BBC said Wednesday U.N. investigators looking into the allegations of trading in gold and weapons were obstructed and threatened, adding that their report was buried to avoid embarrassing Pakistan, a large contributor to U.N. missions around the world.
Well. That is unexpected. Political shenanigans at the UN? That's just troubling to hear about.
A U.N. official at U.N. headquarters in New York denied the report was buried, saying U.N. investigations always take time because of difficulties in the field and the need to conduct a comprehensive inquiry.
Oh, of course. Absolutely. These things take time.
The U.N. Mission in Congo said in a statement it had been aware of the allegations of gold and weapons trafficking in 2004-05 in the Ituri district in northeastern Congo and the U.N.'s internal watchdog launched an investigation in early 2006 soon after the allegations surfaced.

U.N. spokeswoman Michele Montas said there are two investigations under way.
Ah. Well, that certainly settles my mind about a few things.
"The secretary-general looks forward to the early completion of the investigation," Montas said. "He will act on its findings expeditiously and transparently. If wrongdoing is found to have occurred, he will hold those responsible accountable. The secretary-general calls upon any concerned member states to do the same."
Ah, good. People will be held accountable. There will be consequences. Serious ones, no doubt.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Ah, good. People will be held accountable. There will be consequences. Serious ones, no doubt.
Phew! And once that is settled, we can send them into Iraq as per the good Dr. Erb’s suggestion. That should settle things down but quick!
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Personally, I liked this part of the presser, not included in the article linked here, but which I did blog about yesterday...
The team’s report was buried by the UN itself to “avoid political fallout”.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com/
Jack Murtha would fit in well there.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
What would you do, Dale? Ban Pakistan from contributing troops?

Of course, when violent instability breaks out somewhere, you’d then be one of those people bashing the UN for "doing nothing".

So that’s clearly not an option. So, how would you, as the UN for a moment, solve this problem?
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
err, nevermind, should really read more closely...
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com/
You know, I think the point is, UN peacekeeping isn’t a magic wand that miraculously will fix every problem it’s waved over.

Sure, the US military has it’s share problems, but the UN has more problems, at least from the history I’ve seen.

Between this scandal and all the sex scandals related to peace keeper operations. And add on top of that, that the UN tried to bury this report. And on top of that, all the other inefficiencies you get with any large bureaucracy.

And we’re supposed to lovingly cede authority to our troops to them.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com/
What would you do, Dale? Ban Pakistan from contributing troops?
How about we start with swift justice being served. If someone broke the law in uniform in the name of the UN, prosecute them IMMEDIATELY.
Of course, when violent instability breaks out somewhere, you’d then be one of those people bashing the UN for "doing nothing".
They are INCAPABLE of doing SOMETHING. Time and time again they prove it, but time and time again, people like you and Dr. Erb want to throw them back into the breach.
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
But but but....these are the international bodies that I’m told if we would just get involved in Iraq, everything would be "smarter and better!"(tm)

I don’t understand! This can’t be!
Only WE are corrupt, only WE are bozos, only WE are a threat to world peace, harmony and free tofu for all!

Why, these guys should like a bunch of corrupt bozos!
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Of course, when violent instability breaks out somewhere, you’d then be one of those people bashing the UN for "doing nothing".
Really? I would?

Honestly, have you ever actually read my stuff?
 
Written By: Dale Franks
URL: http://www.qando.net
There will be consequences. Serious ones, no doubt.
Boy, I bet those will be some very harsh and nasty letters they get from the UN...
 
Written By: Jay Evans
URL: http://
So that’s clearly not an option. So, how would you, as the UN for a moment, solve this problem?
It’s not an option only in YOUR mind, because you think the UN is a credible organization.

Ever hear of the League of Nations?
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
"U.N. spokeswoman Michele Montas said there are two investigations under way."

Only two? That is clearly inadequate. In addition to at least two more in-house investigations, some outside consultants need to be hired to conduct at least two more independant investigations. Then someone must be hired to audit and review these investigations.

""The secretary-general looks forward to the early completion of the investigation," Montas said"

Early is, of course, a relative word. I am assuming she means early in the next decade.

" Ban Pakistan from contributing troops?"

Why not? One would think they would be more usefully occupied on their own border areas, looking for Taliban, etc.

"Boy, I bet those will be some very harsh and nasty letters they get from the UN..."

Hey! Don’t you realize the damage to ones self-esteem one of these letters can do? The shame and loss of face among ones fellow bureaucrats? This is seerious bizness!
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Damn, Dale, now there’s sarcasm burns all over the inside of my monitor.
 
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
some outside consultants
At least two of which must be related to the Sec-Gen.
 
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
What would you do, Dale? Ban Pakistan from contributing troops?
How about banning them from taking bribes. :)

Again, it is always an all or nothing with you, nost.

I think the key point of this article was the the UN wants to cover up the corruption. So how do you remove corruption? BY shining hard bright lights on it. Corruption can’t stand inquiry. However, the UN feeds and enables it by being too afraid of pissing off the third world. If they found this sort of behavior in the US, it would have been trumpeted from the top of the UN tower.
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
I think the key point of this article was the the UN wants to cover up the corruption.

That’s what been alledged. And cheered on by the same people who were aghast when lefties claimed the US military was trying to cover up, for example, Haditha, when the military was in the middle of conducting an investigation on the subject. Since the UN is in fact conducting investigations, more evidence of a cover-up will be needed than the simple fact that prosecutions haven’t happened yet. I don’t see any documented examples of actual UN actions that would equate to some form of cover up. I don’t even see any on-the-record accusations of specific acts by specific people with names.

In any event,

Honestly, have you ever actually read my stuff?

Let’s put it like this: there’s a vast conservative audience of UN bashing for inaction. If you want to be excluded, I’ll take your word for it. But I noticed you avoided my question: what would you do? Don’t you in fact have to be worried that the country in question will stop committing peacekeepers when you start busting them? And then what, exactly, do you do, when they pull said peacekeepers? Allow the civil war in Congo to reignite?

Good lord, what would you, Generic Conservative, say if the U.N. ever conducted an investigation of US soldiers committed to a peacekeeping mission? There’d be an immediate chorus to say, flip off, U.N., you want to insult our troops, then get by without them.

I’m not saying corrupt U.N. troops shouldn’t be prosecuted. They should. I just see a lot of unserious piling on, without serious examination of the complexities.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
Good lord, what would you, Generic Conservative, say if the U.N. ever conducted an investigation of US soldiers committed to a peacekeeping mission?

Well, when the UN starts providing the vast majority of the funding for US peacekeeping operations, for starters, perhaps we can entertain their opinions about US peacekeeping efforts.
 
Written By: the wolf
URL: http://
Don’t you in fact have to be worried that the country in question will stop committing peacekeepers when you start busting them?
Glasnost, are you seriously implying that busting corrupt UN peacekeepers is a bad idea because the supplying country may stop sending more peacekeepers? Are you sure you want that sort of help?
 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
I just see a lot of unserious piling on...
It’s not as if the UN has any serious track record of doing genuinely useful things. It’s a lot of spending and bluster. The UN has dropped the ball, or failed to take the court, more times than the Bush administration could ever hope to play. There’s a vast liberal audience of UN supporting for inaction then, I guess.

 
Written By: Grimshaw
URL: http://
Glasnost is doing his narrative - UN investigations are better than ours,
they have less corruption than we do, they address their problems and Bush doesn’t, they don’t cover things up and Bush does.

You know, the wolkenkuckucksheim version of the UN that Kofi Annan ran.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
They should contract out to mercenary companies, so that the companies are directly answerable to UN and not be relying upon the action of Pakistan to discipline troops.
 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
Let’s put it like this: there’s a vast conservative audience of UN bashing for inaction.
Hmm. Guess I missed it. Conservatives bash the UN for many things, but I wouldn’t put "inaction" anywhere near the top of the list. A lot of them want the UN to disappear - hard for it to be any more inactive than that.
 
Written By: Billy Hollis
URL: http://
Best site I see. Thanks.
 
Written By: Aileen
URL: http://www.google.com/

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider