Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Servant Corps]

Here's the actual amendment.

Here's the relevant change made:

"In operative paragraph 6 (b), replace any discriminatory reason, including sexual orientation with discriminatory reasons on any basis"

In case it isn't obvious, "on any basis" covers sexual orientation.  Every single piece of "journalism" I've seen on the subject glosses over this fact entirely, because "journalism" these days amounts to a dick-swinging contest based around who can write the most stupidly sensationalist headline.

...

This isn't sensationalist. Sensationalism at least have some measure of truth. This is outright lying.

American Hegomony Talk

Why the United States? If you just want a liberal hegemony, why wouldn't Pax Britannca serve just as well? (Or is it because you're still sore after that Revolution business?)

[DJ]

Yeah, as a neutral party I'd prefer British overlords.

Also LOL @ Stalin bending over and lubing up his ass.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

American Hegomony Talk

Why the United States? If you just want a liberal hegemony, why wouldn't Pax Britannca serve just as well? (Or is it because you're still sore after that Revolution business?)

The US was in a position where it could have established a hegemony. The question is why they didn't take the opportunity? Was it incompetent or over-idealistic leadership? Considering the estimations as to when the soviets would manage to develop nuclear weapons were off by about a decade, perhaps they assumed there'd be more time to deal with them? Then there's the fact that with the exception of generals, the leadership would have elections and public opinion to worry about, and so the whole thing could have been scuttled by shortsighted concerns halfway through, which would have been worse than not starting at all. Fully exploiting the advantage of a monopoly on nuclear weapons would have required leadership that was not only ruthless enough to use it if push came to shove, but could have dealt with the horrible PR that making an example out of tens of thousands of people brings (at least in a war of aggression)...

So I suppose the problem lies in the infighting and petty power struggles inherent to politics, along with the fickle insanity of public opinion. Not that it couldn't have been managed if a sufficiently skilled individual had been present in the upper echelons of US politics at the time, but no such individual existed, and so we have a nuclear headsman's axe over all our necks, and two backwards shitholes with massive populations and equally massive nuclear arsenals undermining the global economy with an unsustainable model based on de facto slavery, while draining resources in a misguided attempt to mimic the US economy circa 1950... So really, I suppose, the biggest problems the world faces are the fault of the USA, for not fixing them when they had the fucking chance.

[Il Palazzo]

The US was in a position where it could have established a hegemony.

What everybody here is trying to tell you, is that this wasn't the case.

[Leafsnail]

Your suggestion is... basically that they should have the exact same thing as the countries they fought?  I mean, you can't keep everyone supressed forever using a limited amount of A bombs.  Sooner or later, someone would be in a position to fight back and, frankly, America would have completely deserved it.

[zilpin]

Your suggestion is... basically that they should have the exact same thing as the countries they fought?  I mean, you can't keep everyone supressed forever using a limited amount of A bombs.  Sooner or later, someone would be in a position to fight back and, frankly, America would have completely deserved it.

+1 this.
Exactly.

Not to mention, the only reason that US had this «opportunity» was because it gain trust and support from allies.
Besides, that kind of mentality is alien to American population.  They only get suckered into wars after heavy fear mongering and lies, and even then they lose taste for it pretty quickly.
Americans like their wars quick.  Drag it out, and they get sick.

Back on topic, it doesn't look like the UN is saying the killings are acceptable, they simply failed to take action.
Since when is it a big shock that the UN failed to take action to stop atrocities?

[cowofdoom78963]

The UN is acting like a bunch of ass clowns.

[MirrorIrorriM]

Isn't it the UN's job to keep rulers from doing crap like this?

[jaked122]

as far as I'm concerned, discrimination prevents a homosexual man from being killed when he is found guilty of a capital crime, therefore this won't be received correctly, but this is removing a no less invalid part of discrimination. however this will be misinterpreted and therefore lead to many more deaths which simply don't need to happen.

[Jackrabbit]

Back on topic, it doesn't look like the UN is saying the killings are acceptable, they simply failed to take action.
Since when is it a big shock that the UN failed to take action to stop atrocities?

They voted to remove it from the list of reasons they considered wrong to execute people for. It's pretty much just a symbolic gesture, because they wouldn't do anything either way, but it's the middle finger of symbolic gestures and highlights just why the UN doesn't work.

So I think the title's appropriate.

as far as I'm concerned, discrimination prevents a homosexual man from being killed when he is found guilty of a capital crime, therefore this won't be received correctly, but this is removing a no less invalid part of discrimination. however this will be misinterpreted and therefore lead to many more deaths which simply don't need to happen.

I don't really get what you're saying. Are you saying that if homosexuality was still on this list people wouldn't execute homosexuals because they are homosexual and it'd be seen as discrimination? Because that's not what would happen, as what the UN was trying to do before they voted it off was protect people from being killed because they were homosexual. Presumably, if they committed a capital crime and were killed for it, the UN wouldn't be bothered.

[Sowelu]

Still think I'd be better off moving to Merchant of Menace's new country.

[jaked122]

I don't really get what you're saying. Are you saying that if homosexuality was still on this list people wouldn't execute homosexuals because they are homosexual and it'd be seen as discrimination? Because that's not what would happen, as what the UN was trying to do before they voted it off was protect people from being killed because they were homosexual. Presumably, if they committed a capital crime and were killed for it, the UN wouldn't be bothered.

I probably don't understand whats going on then. I'm referring specifically to capital punishment, that is what I understand to be an execution. if they are being prosecuted and killed only because of their homosexuality, I agree with you that the UN are a bunch of assholes. but then pardon my ignorant post. I thought I understood it, but I only skimmed the article. I apologize and therefore retract my two cents.

[nenjin]

I hate to say it Jackrabbit, but this is one part of what compromise with the rest of the world looks like. They get a seat in the UN, and they get the right to vote just like every other member. Am I ashamed of the countries that didn't vote in support of the gays? Sure. But being that it's symbolic, and the UN is trying to be all inclusive...yeah. What would the result have been had it gone the other way? The UN condemns members for doing what they did prior to joining the UN. Bad publicity, essentially. Be disappointed if you view it was a multi-nation referendum on violence against homosexuals (to which we can add violence against political dissidents, women, ethnic and religious minorities.....), but I guess I'm not disappointed in the process....meaningless and symbolic as it ultimately is. 

[Nikov]

I tried to warn you all but you didn't listen to me, oh no. Oh no. Its just a harmless little United Nations!

[Il Palazzo]

I WARNED YOU ABOUT UN BRO!!! I TOLD YOU DOG!