Should Bill Clinton be selected to head the UN?

prolesunited

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:39 PM
Original message

Poll question: Should Bill Clinton be selected to head the UN?

There's been talk lately about Clinton being eyed as a replacement for Kofi Anan. What do you think of the idea. Please support your position.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

arcos

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:40 PM
Response to Original message

1. He is NOT eligible...

A citizen of a country with a permanent seat on the Security Council is not eligible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

prolesunited

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #1

6. Whoops!

I did not know that. It was never pointed out in the buzz that I heard. I'm sure they could rewrite rules or create a special post for him, though.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

zann725

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #1

14. Maybe Shrub will rewrite the rules. Afer all, Clinton did ad w/Poppy.

Isn't that the way the Beltway works?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bunny

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:40 PM
Response to Original message

2. I didn't think he was allowed to be, since we are a permanent member

of the Security Council. :shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

autorank

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:41 PM
Response to Original message

3. GREAT ADMIRER of The Big Dog. But this would be a disaster.

The pukes would beat on him all day long whenever there was UN-US policy conflict, they'd with hold funds, etc. They would also pillory the Democrats on an hourly basis. This is radio active. Love the guy and he would be great but, please, not this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pinto

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message

4. didn't vote. Yet, why not? US has only 2 possibilities; Clinton and Carter

But it's a big world....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

sam sarrha

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message

5. the worlds best opportunity to SHIT on Bu$h they ever had.. I'm for it !!!!

Edited on Fri Feb-04-05 08:48 PM by sam sarrha

let's get even.. no better man for the job either..absalutely yes!!!!

except for Carter.. but he doesnt have the edge Bill does to move things..

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

hollowdweller

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #5

9. Too bad cause he would have been perfect.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

imenja

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Feb-06-05 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #5

16. he wouldn't do that

haven't you noticed how reticent he has been to criticize Bush on foreign policy, particularly when abroad? He would not behave as you wish toward Bush. He believes ex-presidents need to be very measured in their criticism of current presidents and has said so on a number of occasions. Besides, I don't think an American should be head of the UN. That organization needs to provide a counter balance to American power.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Maria Celeste

(104 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 09:14 PM
Response to Original message

7. He is not eligible

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NGU

(272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 09:17 PM
Response to Original message

8. I'm confused

I have heard this rumor before and I was under the impression that if you are from a country on the security council, then you can't be head of the UN. Is that true or false?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bullimiami

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 09:29 PM
Response to Original message

10. im just "ok"

he sure would be better than the recent crop of "scared to offends"

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Oversea Visitor

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 09:44 PM
Response to Original message

11. Nope

Stay away from the UN.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

prolesunited

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #11

12. Care to elaborate?

Your comment was quite vague.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Oversea Visitor

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Feb-04-05 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #12

13. Sure

US has done enough damage to the UN. US broke the rules already. So why join UN when you don't respect it. After all it is so corrupted. I think the UN be fine without the US at this moment. After all UN objectives is to ensure that incident like what Germany did in World War 2 are not repeated. At this moment US is threatening the world.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

imenja

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Feb-06-05 12:26 AM
Response to Original message

15. Secretary General should not be an American

The US is the world's largest empire and wields far too much power as it is. The UN needs to provide a counter balance to American power. It's head should not be an American, and I don't think the member nations would approve an American for the position, no matter how much they may like him.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:54 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.