ARE YOU FOR OR AGAINST THE UNITED NATIONS LEAVING THE USA???

by Drue-AFCL Posted 2012/05/13 03:22:12

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	SEE YA	298 votes	88%
	STAY	40 votes	12%

More polls by Drue-AFCL

DizziNY 2012/05/14 01:47:51 (edited)

SEE YA

+7

reply
Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/05/14 01:35:33

SEE YA

+7
More than "see ya." Our liberties, and our heritage, are Nunnayer Beeswax!

reply
Balladeer-PWCM-POTL 2012/05/14 01:34:23

SEE YA

+4
it is time to admit that the UN is a failure ...that all they are is a body hostile to the USA...i say we pull out...they go to Geneva and STAY there. we put that real estate to better use...after the building is either fumigated...OR torn down

reply
Christine/Rest in peace Pet... 2012/05/14 01:29:59 (edited)

SEE YA

+5
Our country has other finacial priorites that should come first. The UN body is no longer friendly toward the US, is trying to take our freedoms and way of life away from us, and stab us in the back while we are expected to pay for the knife. The rights of individual countries are coming in last to the global mentality this organization represents. It should go the way of the League of Nations and for the same reasons. Corruption, misuse, and abusive power plays that undermine the original purpose of this organization.

reply
Wyzard 2012/05/14 01:22:02

SEE YA

+5
We should leave the UN.

reply
Plantgypc 2012/05/14 01:17:06

SEE YA

+6
Let another country support their mooching butts.

reply
Donnie 2012/05/14 01:11:52
Jack 2012/05/14 01:11:27

SEE YA

+2
Some loser/rogue nation would then stop accusing the UN of being a US led organization.

reply
Boris Badinov 2012/05/14 01:05:44

SEE YA

+5

reply
shadow 2012/05/14 00:56:44

SEE YA

+7
It could not happen fast enough...

reply
electracon 2012/05/14 00:40:47

SEE YA

+5
Hasta lavista baby

reply
Couri 2012/05/14 00:19:46

STAY

+1
The UN offers the bases for global human rights. Why should they leave?

reply
gregaj7 to Couri 2012/05/14 04:35:39

+1
Agenda 21, for starters. Global Elitist communism/socialism/fascism/etc for another.

reply
Couri to gregaj7 2012/05/14 05:03:02

Oh wow a conspiracy theorist. You do realize the United states is one of the 5 permanent members of the UN and that we helped draft Agenda 21 right? It's all about decreasing poverty in other nations.

Oh but wait, republicans need poor people so that they can continue to be rich. Without the poor, your entire social status would be ruined.

reply
gregaj7 to Couri 2012/05/14 06:12:17

The muni-corp "United States" is in international bankruptcy to the Rothschild/Rockefeller cabal, which also controls the UN. "We" didn't help draft 'Agenda 21' anymore than "we" can be the Estate Trust entity known as "United States citizen". Paper and Flesh do not mix anymore than oil & water.

reply
joe mauro to Couri 2012/05/14 23:06:49

ru 4 real?

reply
Couri to joe mauro 2012/05/14 23:16:12

Are you a 13 year old girl? Learn how to type, spell, and use proper grammar.

reply
Cheetah 2012/05/13 23:54:42

SEE YA

+2

I hear they make great for target practice

reply
joe mauro to Cheetah 2012/05/15 01:45:52

court is a dyke diplomat

reply
EdVenture 2012/05/13 23:21:37

STAY

+1
I'm not sure of their complete function but in this global age i think it may be prudent in that sanctions can be placed on say Iran for example. It may also be a vehicle that can be effective to stem conflict or war. Often it is necessary to have an intermediary force to achieve the best results. Lastly i can't help but wonder if the question migrates to an appetite for un-uniting the united states.

reply
shadow to EdVenture 2012/05/14 00:59:10

+3
The UN does not get involved with anything hostile. They prefer to hide behind the guise of a bunch of nations that get along together when in fact they do not - so nothing gets done.

reply
EdVenture to shadow 2012/05/14 01:15:04

What is your source of information draws u to that conclusion?

reply
shadow to EdVenture 2012/05/14 03:30:11

+1
I have an inside source....

reply
Kara ~~... to shadow 2012/05/14 03:34:32

+2
Good for you Shadow... ha ha

reply
shadow to Kara ~~... 2012/05/14 03:36:10 (edited)

+1
Actually... its the truth...

reply
Kara ~~... to shadow 2012/05/14 03:40:43

+1
Cool.

reply
shadow to Kara ~~... 2012/05/14 03:36:45

+1
Been missing you girl!

reply
Kara ~~... to shadow 2012/05/14 03:40:30

+1
Nice to see you. I haven't been on much lately.

reply
shadow to Kara ~~... 2012/05/16 03:08:51

Me either... but it looks like I have managed to stir up a hornets nest on a few polls....

reply
Drue-AFCL to EdVenture 2012/05/14 03:07:28

CHECK THIS OUT AND MAYBE YOU WILL BE ENLIGHTENED AS TO WAHT THEIR REAL MISSION IS. . . . . THEY DON'T EVEN TRY AND HIDE IT. . . . YOU JUST HAVE TO LOOK!

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/age...

reply
EdVenture to Drue-AFCL 2012/05/14 03:14:35

I don't get what you are opposed to. It clearly says its non-binding and it seems to me it is carefully written for a global international community which we are a part of. I don't get your concern can you be a little more specific?

reply
gregaj7 to EdVenture 2012/05/14 04:38:06

+1
The UN is part of the problem, not the solution. The UN is an antithesis to Freedom/Liberty/Sovereignty/etc.

reply
EdVenture to gregaj7 2012/05/14 04:43:49

You do not provide me with any evidence. I am not qualified to pass judgement on them at this time however I can understand the possible good such an organization can offer internationally.

reply
gregaj7 to EdVenture 2012/05/14 04:47:43

+1
Agenda 21. Happy researching.

reply
EdVenture to gregaj7 2012/05/14 04:49:57

Have read and scanned much of it and fail to see what the issue is?

reply
gregaj7 to EdVenture 2012/05/14 06:13:23

+1
Individual Sovereignty.

reply
EdVenture to gregaj7 2012/05/14 18:34:27

I considered that and nowhere did i see that challenged in fact the document seems to be premised on participants retaing and protecting their sovereignty. I feel that the doc were drafted to apply to a wide range of governments and variations that may exist between them. The purpose seems to be good intentioned and prudent as well, though industrial scale polluters may object.

reply
gregaj7 to EdVenture 2012/05/14 19:01:33

+1
What's their definition of Sovereignty?

reply
EdVenture to gregaj7 2012/05/14 20:26:08

+1
I take away from it that is independence on a parralell with their existing individual governments and body politic but with an eye toward the good of the public and with a goal of protecting the worlds resources and the enviroment in a sustainable fashion. Regards

reply
gregaj7 to EdVenture 2012/05/14 21:34:37

+1
I don't.

reply