Mobs, security forces attack U.N. cars in Ivory Coast

UN dispatches people and then tie their hands when they need to protect themselves. It's dangerous to do any work for this organization of bleeding hearts who couldn't fight their way out of a wet brown paper bag.

this organization of bleeding hearts who couldn't fight their way out of a wet brown paper bag.

From the tone of this comment I wonder what the writer was intending to communicate. With the UN it is refreshing to see people endeavoring for strangers and humanity in general, instead of for their own pure benefit. If the UN doesn't attempt to step in, who will?

With the UN it is refreshing to see people endeavoring for strangers and humanity in general,

Well I guess what I am saying is that to endeavor for strangers and humanity it is best to put aside political correctness and step in with force if need be to protect people from becoming victims of violence but that the UN is pretty weak at the degree of necessary force to protect them. In the past the UN has dragged their feet on Rwanda and gotten peacekeepers killed by ordering them to put down their weapons. I have little respect for an organization that endangers the ones working for it and the people they are supposed to be protecting.

"It's dangerous to do any work for this organization of bleeding hearts who couldn't fight their way out of a wet brown paper bag."

Yes they should start a civil war war by getting involved, and if all fails they can contact the gung-ho on the American right who always chopper themselves in with Chuck Norris at the helm with 30 or so crack troops.

I've seen the Delta Force, I know how it works. 2 suicide bombings per day, every day in "liberated" Iraq aren't going to change my opinion that a bigger stick fixes everything!

Madverts: Yes they should start a civil war

Can you imagine foreign troops being on your soil? The UN is just inviting attacks and inflaming the locals by being there.

Isn't that the standard line or does that just apply when the troops are from the US...

Yes they should start a civil war war by getting involved.

I guess you don't understand the theory of how the UN is supposed to work. The civil war is already there and the UN troops are sent in to make sure the parties don't commit crimes against each other and make a more peaceful atmosphere for reconciliation. But that is the Liberal rose colored glasses ideal that is far from reality. So the UN sends in troops to be politically correct like the Bono types to show how much they care but in reality doesn't enable them to do s**t to stop atrocities. This is the ultimate liberal dilemma that you can't seem to own up to. Political Correctness which also G Bush 1 suffered from as he kowtowed to the UN letting world opinion tie their hands from getting the job done back in 91.

Africa is not the safest place on the planet, I feel sorry for these UN guys. Time to call Superman?

"The civil war is already there"

Civil un-rest yes, civil war, not yet.

"UN troops are sent in to make sure the parties don't commit crimes against each other and make a more peaceful atmosphere for reconciliation. But that is the Liberal rose colored glasses ideal that is far from reality."

I'm not sure which liberal you're talking about, or even if these peeple physicaly exist for you at all outside some over exubernt talk radio hosts suggestion. Their isn't going to be any "peaceful atmosphere for reconciliation" until the dictator either cedes power or is removed. Th UN is certainly not going to instigate regime change. THe UN, of which America is also a memeber, has no stomach for it.

"So the UN sends in troops to be politically correct like the Bono types to show how much they care but in reality doesn't enable them to do s**t to stop atrocities."

You've charged me with not understanding the sitiuation in the Cote d'Ivoire and then you write cjhildish things like this! Yeah, send in Chuck Norris (after his latest facelift) to stop the attrocities with the Delta Force. Flag waving and national anthem signing in the plane home after a swift installation of democracy, maybe a cute Jewish kid for extra effect and don't forget to mention 9/11....

"this West African nation's disputed election"

( Sigh ) I'm sure it is disputed...

THe UN, of which America is also a memeber, has no stomach for it.

Which is what I'm saying. I'm saying they shouldn't bother sending anybody because they just become targets themselves.

Shouldn't we all just let Africa be Africa like we are usually told? But then on the other hand we are also told we "have to help Africa". Well we can't if they are killing each other and the helpers too.

Your argument is childish.

UN troops haven't just been sent there, they've been there since around 2002. They cannot act because there isn't enbough of them and they would be machettied to death by mobs of uneducated Ivorians.

Become an activist or something if it bothers you so much. Sitting and screaming at the UN as your earlier post did, not understanding the facts and trhe usual far-right trait of screaming of the top of everyone without any kind of solution doesn't cut it anymore.

Mad I have reasons I don't want the UN sending people there. That includes friends that could be put in harms way just to be targets of angry mobs. You are right. There isn't enough of them. And if that is the case and the UN can't guarantee that they can make a difference then maybe they should stop wasting money and lives with superficial attempts at political correctness. I'm not arguing with you. I'm stating my opinion and why I have it. I'm not trying to win any argument here. Grow up yourself.

Hmmm....ok I was probably too hard on you, I appreciate your honesty. The UN and the way missions are run, along with the monetary waste needs to be revised, I agree whole-heartedly. This crisis is over one individus refusal to cede power. The monetary freeze will probably end up with an un-paid army turning against Gbagbo, but not before a bloody period of horrific third-world tribal misery.

And that could be months away. Maybe the fiasco's in Iraq and Afghanistan have reduced the appetite for Western intervention....

Maybe the fiasco's in Iraq and Afghanistan have reduced the appetite for Western intervention....

Actually I think it was the Somalia mission without a purpose that has turned the west off of helping Africa. It certainly cemented it for me.

Sorry super, I missed your ealrier gem:

"Can you imagine foreign troops being on your soil? The UN is just inviting attacks and inflaming the locals by being there."

What else can I say, other than ask you if you'd been on the bottle before typing that. The UN troops are there as part of an agreement from 2002 I believe. It's a "Peace Keeping" mission.

Get it?

It's not an ariel bombardment of a city of 5 million with the pretext of (insert cough here) "liberation".

"Isn't that the standard line or does that just apply when the troops are from the US..."

The invasion of Iraq has been a bloody and costly disaster. Why you feel the need to drag it here, on a situation with absolutely no bearing whatsoever......well, I'm bemused.

Gbabo is doing what all African dictators do. He's drunk on power. Until he runs out of money or the machette's come out in force, he'll drag the country into a bloody third world slaughter without the slightest compassion for Ivorians. It has nothing to do with the US, jeez, give the complex a rest!

MH,

"Actually I think it was the Somalia mission without a purpose that has turned the west off of helping Africa. It certainly cemented it for me."

Yeah, either full involvement or no involvement is the key I think. Going at it half-heartedly is a discredit to the people involved on the ground, awaste of lives, money and resources. Not to mention the credibility of the UN, that JT's radicals take full advantage of despite the idea of the organizations existence being a force for good for us all.