BEWARE: The Netherlands formally elected in UN Security Council

[Penguin]

Traditional hangop takes longer... need to hung all night.. in cheescloth...and then next day...wow... yummmmy...with cherries and some cherry sap... wow... groot oma used to make it on Kerst... learned from her...along with many secrets... and all those stories of the war... hoe opa met her...

On topic.. The Netherlands is a blessing to be had in the UNSC. The Dutch Diplomacy is extremely balanced and forward looking after all we are a trading nation. OVC.

Well, what is the difference between 'overnight' and 'for 8 hours'?

Our diplomats should bring some hangop to the UN-SC ;-)

Very easy to answer that.

China won't leave the UNSC because we have veto power. Which means we can veto any resolution we want, for whatever reason.

This is my entire point. The P5 is nothing more than a club of veto powers, using those veto powers and their seats to further their own national interests. While the P5 has failed their primary task of maintaining global peace and security, in fact most of the P5 members are currently in the process of dropping bombs in the Middle East as we speak.

So, what are you complaining about then?!

I never said the UNSC was "inconsequential", at all. What I said, if you read the first page, is that the UNSC has failed in its primary duty to maintain global peace and security.

If you are going to argue with me, at least argue against points that I have actually made.

Oh, so when you said UNSC "failed in its primary purpose, to maintain global peace and security." and "is pretty useless" in relation to veto powers, you were suggesting it is consequential?

With consequential meaning:
1. following as an effect, result, or outcome; resultant; consequent.
2. following as a logical conclusion or inference; logically consistent.
3. of consequence or importance: a consequential man in his field.
4.self-important; pompous.

Or was your meaning actually closer to inconsequential
1.of little or no importance; insignificant; trivial.
2. inconsequent; illogical.
3. irrelevant.

So, as for the so-called "strawman argument', there was no covert replacement of your proposition with a different one.

As I indicated before, if all you come do here is be a sour puss, please move on. That kind of behaviour is not in accordance with the primary purpose of this thread.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

So, what are you complaining about then?!



Oh, so when you said UNSC "failed in its primary purpose, to maintain global peace and security." and "is pretty useless" in relation to veto powers, you were suggesting it is consequential?

With consequential meaning:
1. following as an effect, result, or outcome; resultant; consequent.
2. following as a logical conclusion or inference; logically consistent.
3. of consequence or importance: a consequential man in his field.
4.self-important; pompous.

Or was your meaning actually closer to inconsequential
1.of little or no importance; insignificant; trivial.
2. inconsequent; illogical.
3. irrelevant.

So, as for the so-called "strawman argument', there was no covert replacement of your proposition with a different one.

As I indicated before, if all you come do here is be a sour puss, please move on. That kind of behaviour is not in accordance with the primary purpose of this thread.

If I wanted to say it was inconsequential, I would have said it was inconsequential.

There is no need to put words in my mouth, and to construct straw man arguments based on things I never said.

And for your reference, I do not think the UNSC is "inconsequential" at all. What I said is that it has failed in its primary purpose, and is now basically a club for the P5 veto members to protect and further their own national interests. Which makes it useful for the P5, but useless for the countries whom the P5 are dropping bombs on in the Middle East.

If you want to argue against something, then argue against that, since that is something I have actually said.

 

[Penguin]

If I wanted to say it was inconsequential, I would have said it was inconsequential.

There is no need to put words in my mouth, and to construct straw man arguments based on things I never said.

And for your reference, I do not think the UNSC is "inconsequential" at all. What I said is that it has failed in its primary purpose, and is now basically a club for the P5 veto members to protect and further their own national interests.

If you want to argue against something, then argue against that, since that is something I have actually said.

And I say, if you think that is bad, then leave the club (and if you don't, that makes you an accomplice).

And since in your first response you used :
You are still laughing at your own.

Have a beer, get a life.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

And I say, if you think that is bad, then leave the club (and if you don't, that makes you an accomplice).

And since in your first response you used :
You are still laughing at your own.

Have a beer, get a life.

I have already answered that question, did you forget already?

And again with the strawman arguments.

I never said it was bad. Not for Chinese national interests anyway, since we are a veto power.

You seem to be quite hypersensitive, which by the way doesn't justify the constant use of strawman arguments.

Is it so difficult to argue against things that I have actually said?

 

[Khanate]

UN Security Council Seat Sharing Program — a new European initiative for sustainable impunity.

 

[macnurv]

Yeah, Iceland is at the top of the "Global Peace Ranking". I say we all vote to gang up on them and kick their smartass peacenik butts so other countries can have a chance to be #1.

It doesn't have to be something big. Maybe just an amphibious landing with a few tactical nukes here and there.

HAHAHA

 

[Penguin]

I have already answered that question, did you forget already?

And again with the strawman arguments.

I never said it was bad. Not for Chinese national interests anyway, since we are a veto power.

You seem to be quite hypersensitive, which by the way doesn't justify the constant use of strawman arguments.

Is it so difficult to argue against things that I have actually said?

No, it is very easy, as indicated (and no matter how many time you inapropriately cry 'strawman') but you come here simply to be a pain in the butt. As indicated before, if you can't contribute like a good sport, move on. If you find a post offensive, report it.
Good day.

 

[Vassnti]

Last update: 02 June 2017 17:25

The Netherlands was chosen as a member of the UN Security Council in 2018. The election was a formality because the Netherlands and Italy had already agreed to divide the seat for the period 2017-2018.

Both countries fought last year for one vacant temporary seat of two years, but both received insufficient support. Then it was agreed that Italy occupied the seat this year and the Netherlands next year. It's a rarity that two countries share a temporary seat.

The Security Council focuses on the preservation of peace and security and imposes sanctions, deploying peacekeeping forces and influencing policies. The US, Russia, China, France and Great Britain are permanent members, the other ten members rotate. In March of 2018, the Netherlands is one month chairman of the Security Council.

It is the sixth time since 1946 that the Netherlands is joining the Netherlands as a non-permanent member. "Membership is an excellent opportunity for the highest level of influence and subjects that are important for us to get on the agenda," says Minister of Foreign Affairs.

http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/4741383/nederland-formeel-gekozen-in-veiligheidsraad-vn.html

So, requests anyone?
(Palm grease payment details handled off line)

Any chance forming a UN mission to liberate California ?

I could pay in sardines

 

[mike2000 is back]

LOL

 

[Penguin]

Any chance forming a UN mission to liberate California ?

I could pay in sardines
View attachment 402135

Sardines (a herring relative) will do just fine, thank you. I'm sure we can work out a suitable quantity and terms.

Let's sea what can be done!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yes_California
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_National_Party
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_North_America#United_States

No militia's here, clearly (that may or may not be a problem). And Russian involvement should be avoided:

• There are big barriers in the way of California independence. For one, the US Constitution doesn’t grant a state the right to secede. That’s one big reason the Civil War was fought.
• Then there are growing questions about Yes California’s ties to Russia. Yes, Russia.
• Louis Marinelli, who is American, doesn’t live in California, but a dozen time zones away in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg, where he’s an English teacher and lives with his Russian wife. And Marinelli has faced questions about Russian government involvement in the California secession cause. He and other secession supporters attended an anti-globalization conference last year in Moscow backed by the Kremlin. And the Yes California team has gone so far as to open up a self-styled California “embassy” in the Russian capital, in a space provided by the same anti-globalization group.
• There’s been much talk among Russia experts about how the Kremlin supports separatist movements abroad to create discord in other countries, for instance in Ukraine. But Marinelli, had just arrived in California on a flight from Russia before this interview, denies that his independence movement for the Golden State has anything to do with Russia meddling in US politics.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-03-07/leader-california-independence-movement-lives-russia

The California National Party (CNP) and the Californian National Party: while the two groups are unaffiliated, Marinelli has ties to both. It's highly unlikely that either group gets its way in the pursuit of California independence. The last time a state seceded from the US, it was the 1860s and a civil war broke out.
http://www.businessinsider.com/cali...ssia-ties-2017-1?international=true&r=US&IR=T

 

[Penguin]

Fresh grilled sardines, mmmmmm

 

[avrham11]

its good

 

[skyisthelimit]

I bet no one control these nations....

United State
Russia
China
UK
France
Israel
Pakistan
India
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Iran

tu phir is UNSC ka achaar daalain ? LOL

Bhai, North Korea bhi add kar lo. Woh to bade bhai China ka bhi nahi sunta.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

The UN Security Council, maintaining global peace and security for the past half century.

Oh did you just realize that China was a permanent member of the UNSC?

And yes, I was fully aware of that. We have had countless arguments on here about the same topic.

Just because my country is a part of it doesn't mean that the UNSC as an organization hasn't failed in its primary purpose, to maintain global peace and security.

When every single one of the five UNSC permanent members has the power to veto any resolution they want, for whatever reason, it makes the organization pretty useless.

Like with the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, all the so-called international rules have been thrown out the window.

There are other examples
China is one of the few countries that has massively attacked UN forces (in Korea).
China is thus a major contributor to limiting the value of the UN.

Still the UNSC has put a stop to many conflicts.