1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Must the UN stay in Manhattan?

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by mioque, Dec 4, 2005.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 3
  1. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is it necessary for a cash-strapped organization whose mandate is to preserve world peace and fight poverty to occupy one of the most expensive pieces of real estate in one of the world's most costly cities?
     
    This is the question that UN Secretary General Kofi Annan failed to address when he requested that the General Assembly approve a disbursement of $1.6 billion for the necessary refurbishment of the UN headquarters building in New York. A subsidiary question, which has also not been entertained is why imaginative and less onerous solutions have not been investigated.
     
    While the General Assembly is to vote on Annan's proposal, its cost, if adopted, will not be borne equally by the organization's 191 members. Currently, 15 of them, including the five permanent members of the Security Council, contribute some 86 percent of the budget. Whatever the General Assembly's vote, those 15 contributors are duty-bound to their taxpayers to ensure the adoption of the most cost-effective solution. That solution is not the one proposed by Annan.
     
    There is nothing in the UN charter that provides that the UN headquarters must imperatively be in New York. Indeed, when a site was determined in 1946, the preferred location was really Boston. New York was chosen only because John D. Rockefeller Jr. donated the land for the building.
     
    Moving UN headquarters from New York should therefore be considered, provided that some minimum requirements are met. These entail that the new site should be in a developed, foreigner-friendly democracy with a good infrastructure and communication network in an uncongested environment where English is either spoken or commonly understood.
     
    Such a site exists, less than 400 miles from New York - I nominate Montreal.
     
    With land both plentiful and cheap, the government of Canada and the Province of Quebec could donate a site where an ecologically friendly UN city could be built from scratch. It would include meeting facilities, offices, housing, schools, shopping malls and land plots for foreign missions, all an easy commute from Montreal, its airport, its schools, universities and hospitals.
     
    The multicultural environment of the city where the two working languages of the UN, French and English, are spoken would facilitate the integration of the international staff. As for the cost of the project, this would easily be offset by selling the plot of land on the East River in Manhattan where the current UN building is located. Foreign missions that have acquired property in the city could also sell, reaping a handsome profit in the process.
     
    Such a solution, of course, would require an offer from Canada and from Quebec. Were such an offer forthcoming, it should be carefully considered by the main donor governments and not only as a gesture to their own taxpayers. In the wake of the UN's failed reform package and at a time when it is facing the most serious crisis in its 60-year history, that would send a powerful message to an organization where waste is endemic: that business as usual is no longer an option.

    (Alexander Casella, who worked for 20 years with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, is a consultant on refugees, illegal migration and other issues.)

    http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/12/02/opinion/edcasella.php
     
    #1 mioque, Dec 4, 2005
  2. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Great idea! Get them out of New York and out of the USA! If Canada doesn't want them, how about Bikini Island?
     
    #2 church mouse guy, Dec 4, 2005
  3. Ben W

    Ben W Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    6
    Here is a thought Mioque, why not move the U.N to New Zealand?

    New Zealand is politically stable, and its government hasnt had a great deal to do with world politics. I think that given some investagation, they could prove to be a good choice as a host nation of the U.N.
     
    #3 Ben W, Dec 4, 2005
  4. hillclimber

    hillclimber New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,075
    Likes Received:
    0
    perfect, I vote for the Bikini's.
     
    #4 hillclimber, Dec 4, 2005
  5. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not only should we get the UN out of the USA, but we should get the USA out of the UN. Worthless waste of money and space anyway.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
    #5 Joseph_Botwinick, Dec 4, 2005
  6. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,066
    Likes Received:
    1,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It would be way too expensive to move the United Nations from New York. And it would foolish for these United States to pull out of the United Nations. It's the one place where the nations of the world can come together and meet.
     
    #6 KenH, Dec 4, 2005
  7. bapmom

    bapmom New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    I used to think we ought to get completely out of the UN also, until someone brought up the fact that in the UN, the USA is virtually alone standing between Israel and her enemies.

    Is this something any of the rest of you have heard?
     
    #7 bapmom, Dec 4, 2005
  8. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    The land was donated by a private citizen for the express purpose of being the UN headquarters. I would expect conservatives to respect a person's right to use their land as they see fit. Also as Ken referred to, it is good for the world's governments to have a place to meet, especially in today's nuclear environment.
     
    #8 Terry_Herrington, Dec 4, 2005
  9. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    1. Does the private donor also help pay for the security, upkeep, and etc. of the UN building? If so, I totally respect that persons right to private property. When, however, I as a taxpayer start funding a private venture, then it becomes my business to say whether or not I want it there.

    2. Any time the president wants to, he can hop on one of these modern inventions called an airplane and fly to a foreign nation to meet with their leaders. Or they can hop on one of their airplanes and come meet with him. We don't need the UN to do that. And we certainly don't need the UN to stand up for Israel.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
    #9 Joseph_Botwinick, Dec 4, 2005
  10. StraightAndNarrow

    StraightAndNarrow Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    3
    Would we rather have a debate with our enemies or have a war with them? I guess that depends on who's President of the U.S.
     
    #10 StraightAndNarrow, Dec 4, 2005
  11. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    We can have a debate with our enemies without the UN. Seriously, you guys act as if the UN left, the world would come to an end. :rolleyes:

    Joseph Botwinick
     
    #11 Joseph_Botwinick, Dec 4, 2005
  12. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    The UN may end up in Baghdad/Babylon one day. From there, they can oversee the attempted destruction of Israel.
     
    #12 LadyEagle, Dec 4, 2005
  13. bapmom

    bapmom New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then again.....

    we can spy on them all we want to when they are here using our land and as our "guests."

    "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer"?
     
    #13 bapmom, Dec 4, 2005
  14. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,066
    Likes Received:
    1,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't think the United Nations headquarters will leave New York during the next fifty years.
     
    #14 KenH, Dec 4, 2005
  15. church mouse guy

    church mouse guy Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 23, 2002
    Messages:
    22,050
    Likes Received:
    1,858
    Faith:
    Baptist
    perfect, I vote for the Bikini's. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes! It is only logical! Bikini Island needs a new industry. Mioque, you would be for moving them to the Bikini Atoll, wouldn't you?

    http://www.bikiniatoll.com/

    [ December 04, 2005, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: church mouse guy ]
     
    #15 church mouse guy, Dec 4, 2005
  16. hillclimber

    hillclimber New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,075
    Likes Received:
    0
    It was the Rockerfeller's, probably John D., might have been one of his sons that donated the land for the UN.
     
    #16 hillclimber, Dec 4, 2005
  17. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,066
    Likes Received:
    1,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "The General Assembly decided during the second part of its first session in London to locate its permanent headquarters in New York. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., donated land for a building site in Manhattan. Temporary headquarters were established at Lake Success on Long Island, New York. The permanent Secretariat building was completed and occupied in 1951–52."

    - LINK
     
    #17 KenH, Dec 4, 2005
  18. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who pays for the upkeep of the building, security, etc... ?

    Joseph Botwinick
     
    #18 Joseph_Botwinick, Dec 4, 2005
  19. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,066
    Likes Received:
    1,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "How much does the UN cost?
    The regular budget of the UN is some $1.3 billion per year. It pays for UN activities, staff and basic infrastructure but not peacekeeping operations, which have a separate budget. All States of the UN are obligated by the Charter – an international treaty – to pay a portion of the budget. Each State's contribution is calculated on the basis of its share of the world economy.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    How much does the entire UN system spend each year?
    The UN system spends some $12 billion a year, taking into account the United Nations, UN peacekeeping operations, the programmes and funds, and the specialized agencies, but excluding the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). Just over half of this amount comes from voluntary contributions from the Member States; the rest is received from mandatory assessments on those States.

    The United Nations and its agencies, funds and programmes – mainly the UN Development Programme, the World Food Programme, the UN Children’s Fund and the UN Population Fund – spend nearly $6.5 billion a year on operational activities for development, mostly for economic, social and humanitarian programmes to help the world’s poorest countries. In addition, the World Bank, the IMF and IFAD provide billions more annually in loans that help to eradicate poverty, foster development and stabilize the world economy."

    - LINK
     
    #19 KenH, Dec 4, 2005
  20. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Ken. In that case, Terry, I respect Rockefellers right to do whatever he wishes with his property and money. I do not, however, respect the right of the UN to force me to give my money to them to pay for an organization I don't believe in or have any trust for. Rockefeller may own that piece of land, but he does not own America. Unless a private billionaire, like maybe George Soros, would like to pay the USA's dues, then I say get the UN out of the USA and the USA out of the UN.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
    #20 Joseph_Botwinick, Dec 4, 2005
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 3
Loading...