Another example of what's wrong with the UN

kochman

kochman

Deity
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
10,818
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/29/robert-mugabe-un-international-envoy-tourism

Robert Mugabe asked to be UN 'leader for tourism'
Click to expand...
Need we go on?

Because Zimbabwe's tourism industry is thriving, this is a solid choice.
Also working on this important use of money:
Drew Barrymore, David Beckham, Orlando Bloom, and Ricky Martin
Because being a star means you understand tourism. Duh.

Mugabe and his allies are subject to EU and US sanctions preventing them from travelling to EU countries including Britain, although he does attend the UN general assembly in New York.
Click to expand...
He understands how having your tourism abilities limited hurts one's feelings... He promises a kinder, gentler type of tourism.

This, along with Iran being placed on the women's rights council, etc...
Let's keep shoveling money to an organization dominated by dictators and tyrants...

Might as well, we waste enough on so much other crap, this is just a drop in the bucket.
 



You may dislike the UN, but I think it's wiser to buttress the intent of the organisation, instead of joining the people trying to pull it down.
 
Rather important bit you left out:
UNWTO, which has headquarters in Madrid, insisted that it had not awarded Mugabe an official title. Sandra Carvao, its co-ordinator of communications, said: "Correct would be to say UNWTO has presented both presidents with an open letter which calls for them to support tourism as a means to foster sustainable development in their countries to the benefit of their people and consequently ask them to support the sector in this respect."

She added: "UNWTO does not have an ambassadors programme and the receiving of the UNWTO/WTTC [World Travel and Tourism Council] open letter implies no legal commitment or title attribution to the country or the head of state or government in question."
Click to expand...
This certiantly doesn't make it to the Top 10 list of the 'UN's Best Ideas', but it isn't like they are giving Mugabe the Nobel Peace Prize. However, I fail to see how asking a leader, however dispicable, to support tourism to improve the country and alleviate pressure on the common person, is a good indicator of something being wrong with the UN.
 
I'm not saying there hasn't been good from the UN...
I'm just saying, can't we get rid of the absolute garbage it produces and keep the good stuff? *Annan*

@Ady
He should be in front of a judge, that's why...
 
yeah blame the UN... but at least read the article before frothing at the mouth

Spoiler :
UNWTO, which has headquarters in Madrid, insisted that it had not awarded Mugabe an official title. Sandra Carvao, its co-ordinator of communications, said: "Correct would be to say UNWTO has presented both presidents with an open letter which calls for them to support tourism as a means to foster sustainable development in their countries to the benefit of their people and consequently ask them to support the sector in this respect."
She added: "UNWTO does not have an ambassadors programme and the receiving of the UNWTO/WTTC [World Travel and Tourism Council] open letter implies no legal commitment or title attribution to the country or the head of state or government in question."


edit* beaten to it by Adjidca... but its worth saying twice edit*
 
It is very insensitive for you to start this thread on the anniversary of Bishop Abel Muzorewa being sworn in as Zimbabwe's 1st black PM.
 
Graffito... your post makes no sense.

It's like, if I wrote, for the benefit of all people, etc, etc, etc.
And, I nominate for this job, such and such mass murderer tyrant...

Kind of destroys the intent... just like putting Iran or S. Arabia in the council for Women's Rights... don't you think?
 
He should be in front of a judge, that's why...
Click to expand...
So let's condemn the millions that live in the country to poverty and misery where they are more concerned with survival than gaining liberty and democracy? Force the country out of the global economy so a sordid little dictator can rule until he dies, with another sordid little dictator taking his spot? You don't get political change in a country by turning them into a pariah state exiled from world affairs.

Kind of destroys the intent... just like putting Iran or S. Arabia in the council for Women's Rights... don't you think?
Click to expand...
Not really. Expose them to all the other countries on the council and the modern idea of woman's rights. Spread the ideas and change will come. Even assuming Iranian treatment of women is as bad as you believe it is (ignoring that culturaly and socially they are probablly one of the most pro-Western societies in the Middle East), only good can come of exposing them to progressive ideas and getting them integrated into world culture. (I feel I must ask, why aren't you including India on the list? India is still a very patriarchal country.)
Freakonomics did a study of how 'free' women were in India and discovered that the more a village was integrated into the modern world, the more rights the women were able to exercise. It follows that the same would hold true on a national level.
 
kochman said:
Graffito... your post makes no sense.

It's like, if I wrote, for the benefit of all people, etc, etc, etc.
And, I nominate for this job, such and such mass murderer tyrant...
Click to expand...

what job was Migabe nominated for ...
Kind of destroys the intent... just like putting Iran or S. Arabia in the council for Women's Rights... don't you think?
Click to expand...

No... not if them countries have to legally sign up for the UN postion on womens rights to be on the council... it dose not give them the power of veto anything and they will not really sway other menbers but now publicly have to suport the UN postion

edit* working away from home this week... very slow internet,and Ajidica again beats me to the post
edit*
 
Yes, let's go back to the League of Nations method of making an universal organization with far reaching goals and powers that doesn't include any members that might disagree with the majority.
 
Ah, it sounds like some people would like to expand the jurisdiction and authority of the International Criminal Court. Actually, I quite agree with that.
 
Has Zimbabwe refused to pay their dues on a regular basis? Do they frequently veto Security Council sanctions of a particularly recidivist country? Have they even blithely ignored the UN and invaded a country on the basis of lies and deceit, while even using UN sanctions as an excuse to do so?

And this is "another example of what's wrong with the UN"? Some podunk African strongman of a country best known for brutally repressing blacks for centuries so whites could get filthy rich off their collective suffering may become the head of an organization that doesn't really do anything important?
 
Ajidica said:
You don't get political change in a country by turning them into a pariah state exiled from world affairs.
Click to expand...

Isn't that how the world made Rhodesia change? And Boeristan to its South?
 
Without a global monopoly of force, all our nations are hostages to the need to compete with other nations for resources and power. Only once we end this last threshold of barbarianism can we gain true freedom over the destiny of our societies. For this reason, I detest any nonconstructive UN-bashing. As it is the most successful step towards international cooperation ever made and has achieved unique and great accomplishments. It is only to be expected that to explore such a new frontier is accompanied with flaws of various kinds.
 
SiLL said:
Without a global monopoly of force, all our nations are hostages to the need to compete with other nations for resources and power. Only once we end this last threshold of barbarianism can we gain true freedom over the destiny of our societies. For this reason, I detest any nonconstructive UN-bashing. As it is the most successful step towards international cooperation ever made and has achieved unique and great accomplishments. It is only to be expected that to explore such a new frontier is accompanied with flaws of various kinds.
Click to expand...

+1 Ditto.

kochman said:
Drew Barrymore, David Beckham, Orlando Bloom, and Ricky Martin
Because being a star means you understand tourism. Duh.
Click to expand...

I always thought these appointments are for image and exposure, rather than their knowledge of the tourism industry. They could appoint a successful resort owner from Phuket or Sharm el-Sheikh, but they just won't have the prestige.

Appointing people with no knowledge of what it seems they're meant to be doing is not as silly as it sounds. Governments do it all the time (in the Westminster System, you can become a minister of education even if you are a rock musician; it is expected that the minister will be advised by people in their department who are actually knowledgable).
 
Ajidica said:
So let's condemn the millions that live in the country to poverty and misery where they are more concerned with survival than gaining liberty and democracy?
Click to expand...
Oh, because Mugabe being appointed to this glorified tourism board will stop all the terrible things he does to make that country's millions live in poverty and misery while not gaining liberty nor democracy.

Force the country out of the global economy so a sordid little dictator can rule until he dies, with another sordid little dictator taking his spot?
Click to expand...
So, you basically say... whatever, let them have their dickhead ruler who took their nation FROM the global economy and made it one of the worst places on the planet. Good thinking.
You don't get political change in a country by turning them into a pariah state exiled from world affairs.
Click to expand...
They are already pariahs, and suffering, specifically because of Mugabe.
(I feel I must ask, why aren't you including India on the list? India is still a very patriarchal country.)
Click to expand...
Hell, throw any country that practices female infanticide on the list of jerks, obviously. China, India, etc.
 
I can get liking the UN but I really dont see how you can defend putting crackpot dictators in any positions of authority, especially crackpots who cant manage finances.

On the UN as a whole its a mixed bag, plenty of good but the fact that its helpless in any situation that involves a great power or nation that is allied to a great power sort of hampers its usefulness in many areas. For instance the fact its helpless to stop the Syria slaughter because its a zone of Russian interest or its powerlessness to really do anything in the Israel-Palestine zone because its a US interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom