January 12, 2005

Why would anyone call the UN

The Diplomad, on-site in the tsunami disaster are, has a take on the UN effort or lack there of.

The UNocrats know that young Aussies and Yanks have shown them up as the fakes the UNocrats are. That makes them furious; it makes them lash out at us and our friends. They call us names ("stingy"); sniff about our alleged mistakes ("you fed some people twice"); and complain that we won't take their instruction ("you should wear blue vests.") When all else fails, they try to take credit for what Australian and American taxpayers and their military and diplomatic services have done -- yes, indeed, a word of praise for the State Department, which responded superbly.

[...]

The UN's performance in this disaster has been a disgrace of epic proportions; it's vastly overfunded and overstaffed agencies, allegedly established to deal with precisely this type of event, are MIA. We are now in day 16 (DAY 16!) of the crisis, and the UN is still not ready to act. It is no wonder affected countries want to deal with the US and not the UN. At a minimum, the UN owes the world an apology; the entire upper echelon of the UN and its bloated agencies should resign.

If I needed help I'd sure rather have the U.S. military for help than the UN. Look at the UN track record. There is the Oil for Food scandal that did nothing to help the Iraqi people, but made a lot of people rich. There are also many reports of UN “peace-keeping” personnel abusing the very people they were supposed to protect.

Posted by Ted at January 12, 2005 8:19 PM