What is the matter with people... observers don't have jurisdiction, or try to...

Exactly. I'll gladly invite UN observers to oversee elections in my country. I don't suspect irregularities, but if there are I'd rather like to know. And it makes it more difficult for semi-democracies like Russia to throw them out on grounds of Western hypocrisy.
 
kochman said:
http://thehill.com/blogs/global-aff...rks-international-row-with-election-observers

There is a big stink in the 'Merica right now because the UN wants to have observers for our election day.
Why is this a problem? Isn't it better to have more eyes on such a process?

It's not like the UN can void our election results... they can however let us know if there are issues.
Click to expand...

Because election monitoring is for dirty, third-world countries like France. USA #1! We don't need no stinkin' monitors!
 
Hey! If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear! :lol:

But serious, why not allow them to come in and observe? After all, we send election observers to other countries and they don't raise a stink about it.
 
Don't we already have a thread on this? Where I think it was determined the observers do in fact have a legal right to do this?

But at any rate, it's good to have them. If there really was anything wrong, I'd like to know about it. If it goes off without a hitch, then the observers get an easy day at work, which is always nice.
 
basically uppity americans in their ignorance pretend that they invented democracy (lol ancient greeks) and therefore have a divine right to lecture the rest of the world the virtues of democracy, whilst forgetting that a lot of the world is already under democratic rule and does quite an awesome job of it. so when UN guys come to the USA, certain citizens are outraged.

on the other hand, the UN is full of evil regmes and it seems hypocrtiical that they purport to monitor an election where North Korea is a member of the UN
 
I'm torn.

I want to like the idea of election observers, but the U.N. has a terrible record on important things, like freedom of speech, that turns me right off.
 
History_Buff said:
Where I think it was determined the observers do in fact have a legal right to do this?
Click to expand...
To observe? As a free and open society I would have thought we would let anyone observe...
Of course, the US is slowly turning into a police state.
 
Well, I think they want to be inside the polling stations, which could reasonably be off limits to many organizations.

But in the other thread I think there was something about a Federal treaty that allowed them to operate however it was that the observers wanted to, but the Texas state government was still getting all uppity.
 
AlpsStranger said:
I'm torn.

I want to like the idea of election observers, but the U.N. has a terrible record on important things, like freedom of speech, that turns me right off.
Click to expand...

That and they are VERY anti-gun.

I'm really just not a fan of them. I don't want our country to be a part of the UN, and if they want their building in New York they should pay us rent for it or be kicked out. And we should stop funding them.
 
kochman said:
There is a big stink in the 'Merica right now because the UN wants to have observers for our election day.
Click to expand...
Can you define "Big Stink"? Who actually cares about this? Heck, who's actually heard about this outside of right-wing radio paranoia broadcasts? And, can you show that the actual real-life UN wants this today? As opposed to the imaginary UN that is railed against on imaginary, paranoia-inducing right-wing radio?

I know you can't, because this is made up issue.

'Cause, near as I can find by Googling, the real-life UN doesn't want this. Has not proposed this. Feel free to prove me wrong, by you know, posting any evidence whatsoever. Anything. Any evidence.

Aw, you & I both know you'll fail, (yes, I admit, I already looked it up, I was just messing with you) so I'll save you the trouble: Who does actually want this, the thing you claim, that is to say, UN observers overseeing our election?!?

These guys:

The office, originally named Office for Free Elections, was created in 1990 by the Charter of Paris and established in 1991. The name of the office was changed in 1992 to reflect the broadened mandate it received at the 1992 Helsinki Summit., based in Poland. Yes, those guys. It was strictly Polish offshoot, like the Polish TeaParty, that wanted that. Not the UN. All the sudden it's "OMG the UN wanted that!", which is not true. At all.

Those Polish guys 20+ years ago, while we had a Republican President, wanted to oversee our elections, but no one took them serious, & it failed. Yet somehow, by magic, it's been transformed into "OMG teh UN wants to run our Elections".
 
RobAnybody said:
These guys:

The office, originally named Office for Free Elections, was created in 1990 by the Charter of Paris and established in 1991. The name of the office was changed in 1992 to reflect the broadened mandate it received at the 1992 Helsinki Summit., based in Poland. Yes, those guys. It was strictly Polish offshoot, like the Polish TeaParty, that wanted that. Not the UN. All the sudden it's "OMG the UN wanted that!", which is not true. At all.

Those Polish guys 20+ years ago, while we had a Republican President, wanted to oversee our elections, but no one took them serious, & it failed. Yet somehow, by magic, it's been transformed into "OMG teh UN wants to run our Elections".
Click to expand...


That's one distorted view if not a blatant lie of the origin & purpose of OSCE & ODIHR.
Why would 'Polish guys' go to Paris to establish a group for supervising US elections ? I'm pretty sure this Paris is not in Poland.
Had you bothered to actually read what you linked you'd have noticed that instead of 'Polish guys' the Charter of Paris was signed by 'Heads of State or Government of the participating States' including the US.
A year after that the Helsinki Summit was also an international meeting rather than a rally of 'Polish guys'. As I'm also pretty sure that Helsinki is not in Poland it seems rather odd place for 'Polish guys' whom no one takes seriously to group up for single reason being to oversee US elections.
'Based in Poland' is not equal to 'Polish'.

G
 
No Polish person has ever left Poland. It is literally impossible.
 
:lol:

GhostWriter16 said:
That and they are VERY anti-gun.

I'm really just not a fan of them. I don't want our country to be a part of the UN, and if they want their building in New York they should pay us rent for it or be kicked out. And we should stop funding them.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Also quite irrelevant.

MobBoss said:
Why should we care what the UN thinks?
Click to expand...

The UN doesn't "think" anything. Said obervers are invited to come and observe by a US organization. Happens all the time. (Yes, in the US too.)
 
There is already a thread on this issue. Here it is. I ssugest we use it.

GhostWriter16 said:
That and they are VERY anti-gun.

I'm really just not a fan of them. I don't want our country to be a part of the UN, and if they want their building in New York they should pay us rent for it or be kicked out. And we should stop funding them.
Click to expand...

The British goverment is anti-gun and we seem to be a bit more democratic then America inspite of... certain issues.

Unfortunely for you the UN is the main chat room of the international community. Anyway America is a member of the Securit Council: they have power of veto.

O and good luck kicking the UN off its private property. That land was lended to the UN by banks... and I thought you were all for "private property."
 
We have been running elections for 2 1/4 centuries just fine now without the UN. Stuff their request and stuff the whole UN too. Their treatment of the Republic of China and Israel should be sufficient grounds for us to formally void all treaties with that organization and unshackle ourselves.

"Who needs the UN when you have super carriers?" - Me
 
VRWCAgent said:
We have been running elections for 2 1/4 centuries just fine now without the UN. Stuff their request and stuff the whole UN too. Their treatment of the Republic of China and Israel should be sufficient grounds for us to formally void all treaties with that organization and unshackle ourselves.

"Who needs the UN when you have super carriers?" - Me
Click to expand...

Might does not make right. The UN is desighed as a body to ensure international chatter. It has succeeded in areas the League of Nations failed. The Republic of China is issue I can consider but Israel is... a question that one finds a two sided dark greyness.

Anyrate America is not shackled by the UN... on the contrey as a permament Security Council member America wieds great power in the UN.

Percides as noted by the membership, the UN is not the chainer of nations.

...and super carriers do not win guerilla warfare, which is the dominant warfare of this age.
 
VRWCAgent said:
We have been running elections for 2 1/4 centuries just fine now without the UN. Stuff their request and stuff the whole UN too.
Click to expand...

Yes, and ofcourse for most of those centuries the US were a fine democracy right (well not for blacks, women and people without enough money, but who cares about such people...)?

And there was no request by the UN, by the way.

Ailedhoo said:
There is already a thread on this issue. Here it is. I ssugest we use it.
Click to expand...

Nono, that's a thread for serious debate. We don't want that here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Askthepizzaguy
[RD] The threat to American Democracy
15 16 17
Replies
328
Views
26K
Sommerswerd
Sommerswerd
Crezth
In the Beginning Was Napoleon: Background Thread
2
Replies
26
Views
5K
Traveller76
Traveller76
Robert Can't
One Night in Bangkok - Sign ups and pre-game discussion
Replies
14
Views
2K
Double A
Double A
Formaldehyde
How the Police Intercept, Locate, Listen To, and even Jam Cell Phone Communication
Replies
8
Views
3K
IglooDame
IglooDame
S
The Republican Plan to End Democracy in the United States
Replies
13
Views
2K
Super55
S
Back
Top Bottom