Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 30 Sep 1999 01:04:25 -0700 |
Content-Type: |
multipart/mixed; boundary="------------3D7452ED100D3353A131C967" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Martin, what have you done to bring about a redesign of the UN and/or an
elimination of the Security Council veto? I'd like to know because perhaps I
might be interested in joining you in your campaign.
Martin William Smith wrote:
> alister air writes:
> > Martin William Smith wrote:
> >
> > >I don't fail to do anything about it. I chose not to.
> >
> > Why?
>
> I've tried to explain in previous thread, and again in this one. (a)
> I think most activists protest dishonestly; (b) I think such protests
> validate the system that generates bombing situations, and it makes
> that system stronger, and (c) I think I should spend my time trying to
> change the fundamental rules.
>
> > >Not at all. Protesting against each case as it comes up is like
> > >closing the gate after the horse has bolted. The protests against the
> > >NATO bombing did not stop the NATO bombing. Protesting the Russian
> > >bombing would not stop the Russian bombing. Protesting in this way is
> > >a waste of time and resources. The structure has already taken it
> > >into account and is prepared to deal with it. The way to stop
> > >bombings is to prevent the situations that lead to bombing. That
> > >requires changing the rules at the foundational level.
> >
> > But you're not apparently interested in changing the rules. What
> > are you doing to change them, apart from complaining that protests
> > are "a waste of time and resources". What would not be a waste of
> > time and resources?
>
> Redesigning the UN for a start. Remove the veto power for one thing.
>
> > >That's true, but I do have standards.
> >
> > You're doing a good job of hiding them then.
>
> I'm not hiding them. I've been very blunt.
>
> martin
|
|
|