[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: World's Policeman....



---------------------------------------------------------------------
[Topics under debate]: Free Citizen, Long Term Vision, Preamble
___Help make this manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!___
---------------------------------------------------------------------
i agree that a pre-attack res. would have been better, but a resolution
against stopping attack = a res. in favor of attack, logically.

q. is - is US being policeman. i think not. The world is by vast
majority concerned with yugoslavia's repeated massacres of civilians.
are you in favor of killing civilians? that is the implication of your
statement and India's support of Russia/ China.

let us move on.

On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Ram Narayanan wrote:

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> [Topics under debate]: Free Citizen, Long Term Vision, Preamble
> ___Help make this manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!___
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sanjeev wrote:
> 
> > Dear Ram: pl read details at:
> >
> >
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/wl/story.html?s=v/nm/19990326/wl/yugosl
> avia_un_vote_1.html
> >
> > U.N. Council Rejects Russia Bid To Halt NATO Raids
> >
> > UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council Friday rejected a
> > Russian resolution demanding an immediate halt to NATO attacks on
> > Yugoslavia and the resumption of negotiations over Kosovo.
> >
> > The vote in the 15-nation council was only three in favor of the draft,
> > with 12 against and no abstentions. Since it failed to win the minimum
> > nine votes needed for adoption, the United States, Britain and France,
> > who are members of NATO, did not have to exercise their vetoes as
> > permanent members of the Security Council.
> >
> > Voting for the resolution were Russia, China and Namibia. The Russian
> > resolution, co-sponsored by non-council members Belarus and India,
> >     =====================================================
> > called the use of force by NATO without the Security Council's
> > authorization a ``flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter.''
> >
> >
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/ts/story.html?s=v/nm/19990326/ts/yugosl
> avia_14.html
> >
> 
> What Sanjeev has quoted above exactly substantiates my point:
> 
> THERE IS NO SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION FAVORING MILITARY ACTION IN
> YUGOSLAVIA.
> 
> The U S and NATO have committed naked aggression against a sovereign member
> of the United Nations. After the aggression was committed, two permanent
> members of the Security Council tried to stop the aggression and they
> failed. That's all!
> 
> Every country in the world that dares to differ with UNCLE SAM  BEWARE! YOU
> MAY BE NEXT IN LINE! (I am, of course, excluding China  from this list for
> obvious reasons).
> 
> The fact remains that the U S has effectively replaced the British
> imperialists of the 19th and early part of the 20th century!
> 
> Ram Narayanan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
> Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------