Quote:
Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
On the one-in-a-million chance that you aren't joking with the alternatives (I'm willing to take even those odds to help you, my friend), I will clarify. The U.N. is incompetent for running "refugee camps" that are absolutely overrun with gun-toting members of terrorist organizations. As an umbrella, i believe the outrage can properly be stated that the U.N. is incompetent for not screening the recipients of their aid to determine the individual's justifiable and compensatable need for relief.
I generally despise public housing in this country, except that which provides for elderly (a bit broad), veterans, and families with dire and unexpected needs like handicapped children that are not the result of personal choices (like gangbangers who get shot into a wheelchair). Yet, while public housing is often overrun by guntoting thugs, just like Jenin, the guntoting thugs aren't frequently known to threaten the public housing officials with death if they don't provided better gigs.
Its hard to like guntoting thugs in either circumstance, but its hard to like the passer-outers of public money when they knowingly distribute the public money to the guntoters, especially if the aid is positively influenced in any way by the guntoting. Yet, the U.N.'s position seems to be, hey, just quit threatening us and we'll give you whatever we can. Of course, that wouldn't be providing aid and comfort to terrorists, would it?
With our money?
Hello
|
Thanks for not being intimidated by the odds. Usually I'm pretty good about getting you, but I think all the weeeed I used to smoke is clouding my faculties again. I tend to agree with Ty's point about resources, but I don't know shit about the UN's admin of Jenin so that would be a guess.
So let's assume the UN can, but won't, screen the recipients of its aid. Are you saying that the US
is screening those recipients in Iraq? I guess I'd be interested in seeing a cite on that one. If the US isn't, then I don't see your point on why the UN is so poorly suited to help reconstruct Iraq.
And what do you mean by "positively influenced"? I thought the article said they were stopping construction based on the threats, rather than speeding up construction on the complainer/guntoter's bungalow. I think you're putting words into the UN's mouth on this one, but I'm only going off of the story you posted.
Also I note that the story says that none of the money is really "our" money. Unless you are from the UAE.
