POLL: Should American Taxpayers Be Forced To Fund The UN?

[frigidweirdo]

I'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. So i'll say up front that i don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund a foreign Globalist institution that doesn't always have American Citizen best interests in mind. But what do you think?

Then again the UN is far more in the interests of the US than it is of other countries.

Most of the twits here criticizing the U.N. don't even know what it does...

They believe the only world bodies should be ones that agree with right wing American views....

The UN is far from perfect but its members are far from it too... It is not about being perfect, it is about having a world that will have more dialogue and understanding of others positions....

We can have dialogue and understanding without forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions that don't have their best interests in mind. You know, we did survive as a nation long before the UN existed. I know that's very hard for you Globalists to fathom, but it is the truth.

But i don't necessarily want to see the UN gone. I just want my Government to scale back involvement and funding. Foreigners tend to have their own best interests in mind. And that's to be expected. But i don't see why American Taxpayers have to support that.

Then who should support the UN?

 

[Dschrute3]

I'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. So i'll say up front that i don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund a foreign Globalist institution that doesn't always have American Citizen best interests in mind. But what do you think?

Then again the UN is far more in the interests of the US than it is of other countries.

Most of the twits here criticizing the U.N. don't even know what it does...

They believe the only world bodies should be ones that agree with right wing American views....

The UN is far from perfect but its members are far from it too... It is not about being perfect, it is about having a world that will have more dialogue and understanding of others positions....

We can have dialogue and understanding without forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions that don't have their best interests in mind. You know, we did survive as a nation long before the UN existed. I know that's very hard for you Globalists to fathom, but it is the truth.

But i don't necessarily want to see the UN gone. I just want my Government to scale back involvement and funding. Foreigners tend to have their own best interests in mind. And that's to be expected. But i don't see why American Taxpayers have to support that.

Then who should support the UN?

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. So i'll say up front that i don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund a foreign Globalist institution that doesn't always have American Citizen best interests in mind. But what do you think?

Then again the UN is far more in the interests of the US than it is of other countries.

Most of the twits here criticizing the U.N. don't even know what it does...

They believe the only world bodies should be ones that agree with right wing American views....

The UN is far from perfect but its members are far from it too... It is not about being perfect, it is about having a world that will have more dialogue and understanding of others positions....

We can have dialogue and understanding without forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions that don't have their best interests in mind. You know, we did survive as a nation long before the UN existed. I know that's very hard for you Globalists to fathom, but it is the truth.

But i don't necessarily want to see the UN gone. I just want my Government to scale back involvement and funding. Foreigners tend to have their own best interests in mind. And that's to be expected. But i don't see why American Taxpayers have to support that.

Then who should support the UN?

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

 

[Dschrute3]

Then again the UN is far more in the interests of the US than it is of other countries.

Most of the twits here criticizing the U.N. don't even know what it does...

They believe the only world bodies should be ones that agree with right wing American views....

The UN is far from perfect but its members are far from it too... It is not about being perfect, it is about having a world that will have more dialogue and understanding of others positions....

We can have dialogue and understanding without forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions that don't have their best interests in mind. You know, we did survive as a nation long before the UN existed. I know that's very hard for you Globalists to fathom, but it is the truth.

But i don't necessarily want to see the UN gone. I just want my Government to scale back involvement and funding. Foreigners tend to have their own best interests in mind. And that's to be expected. But i don't see why American Taxpayers have to support that.

Then who should support the UN?

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Most of the twits here criticizing the U.N. don't even know what it does...

They believe the only world bodies should be ones that agree with right wing American views....

The UN is far from perfect but its members are far from it too... It is not about being perfect, it is about having a world that will have more dialogue and understanding of others positions....

We can have dialogue and understanding without forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions that don't have their best interests in mind. You know, we did survive as a nation long before the UN existed. I know that's very hard for you Globalists to fathom, but it is the truth.

But i don't necessarily want to see the UN gone. I just want my Government to scale back involvement and funding. Foreigners tend to have their own best interests in mind. And that's to be expected. But i don't see why American Taxpayers have to support that.

Then who should support the UN?

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

 

[Dschrute3]

We can have dialogue and understanding without forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions that don't have their best interests in mind. You know, we did survive as a nation long before the UN existed. I know that's very hard for you Globalists to fathom, but it is the truth.

But i don't necessarily want to see the UN gone. I just want my Government to scale back involvement and funding. Foreigners tend to have their own best interests in mind. And that's to be expected. But i don't see why American Taxpayers have to support that.

Then who should support the UN?

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Then who should support the UN?

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

 

[Dschrute3]

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Well, insult me if you like. But i'm still not a Globalist. I'm only interested in advancing American Citizens' best interests. Any institution not serving that purpose, is of no interest to me.

 

[bripat9643]

All U.S. government funding begins in the democratically elected House of Representatives. Taxation through representation is not forcing.

Yeah it is, asshole. If two wolves and a sheep vote on what to have for dinner, is the sheep volunteering to become the main course?

 

[bripat9643]

Anyone who chooses to. If American Globalists wanna contribute their own income to foreign institutions like the UN, i'm good with that. But i'm not good with them thinking they have the right to force all Americans to. The UN by its nature, doesn't always have American Citizens' best interests in mind. It's a foreign institution. Americans shouldn't be forced to support it.

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Your delusion that we have any power over the U.N. is comical. To the extent we do, we are violating all the principles that it was founded on and that turds like you claim to believe in.

 

[Dschrute3]

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Your delusion that we have any power over the U.N. is comical. To the extent we do, we are violating all the principles that it was founded on and that turds like you claim to believe in.

I believe the UN has too much influence over us. It's been undermining American Citizen best interests for many years. And that's because it's a foreign institution. It isn't set up to solely advance American Citizen interests.

Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. And i don't blame them for that. It's to be expected. But i don't see why i should be forced to fund foreigner interests. At the very least, our Government should scale back our involvement and funding.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The US chooses to. Why? Because they're permanent members of the security council and the UN is a very good tool for the US to get what it wants.

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Well, insult me if you like. But i'm still not a Globalist. I'm only interested in advancing American Citizens' best interests. Any institution not serving that purpose, is of no interest to me.

I'm sorry if you felt insulted what I said, I certainly didn't intent any insult.

My personal belief about Nationalism is that it is about making up your own warm and fuzzy view of the world that doesn't have much to do with the truth. I didn't necessarily mean that this is your view, just that this is what Nationalism is, and you declared yourself a Nationalist.

Nationalists like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia who used a war in 1389 to go around starting wars that disrupted a whole country, saw lots of people killed, all for Nationalist reasons, none of them were actually based on the reality of the situation, just the "reality" they had created for themselves.

I could go on and on about different Nationalist leaders, and you'd struggle to find reality there. Perhaps you're not a nationalist, but certainly I don't see you look for the truth on this UN issue.

I'm not necessarily a globalist either. I don't actually like the UN, I don't like the power the US has. In fact the reasons I don't like the UN are because the US has too much power within the UN (among many other things), and you hate the UN because you think it doesn't carry out US interests, which is completely different.

But you're telling me that the UN doesn't advance US citizens' best interests, and yet you don't appear to know what the UN does or how it actually does advance US citizens' interests.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Your delusion that we have any power over the U.N. is comical. To the extent we do, we are violating all the principles that it was founded on and that turds like you claim to believe in.

I believe the UN has too much influence over us. It's been undermining American Citizen best interests for many years. And that's because it's a foreign institution. It isn't set up to solely advance American Citizen interests.

Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. And i don't blame for that. It's to be expected. But i don't see why i should be forced to fund foreigner interests. At the very least, our Government should scale back our involvement and funding.

You believe?

Believing is all very well and good, the question is (this is after all a political forum) can you SHOW that this is the case?

 

[Dschrute3]

It doesn't always get what it wants. Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. That's to be expected. Why should American Taxpayers be forced to fund foreigners' best interests?

I'm not a Globalist. My only concern is advancing Americans' best interests. If a particular institution isn't doing that, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it.

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Well, insult me if you like. But i'm still not a Globalist. I'm only interested in advancing American Citizens' best interests. Any institution not serving that purpose, is of no interest to me.

I'm sorry if you felt insulted what I said, I certainly didn't intent any insult.

My personal belief about Nationalism is that it is about making up your own warm and fuzzy view of the world that doesn't have much to do with the truth. I didn't necessarily mean that this is your view, just that this is what Nationalism is, and you declared yourself a Nationalist.

Nationalists like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia who used a war in 1389 to go around starting wars that disrupted a whole country, saw lots of people killed, all for Nationalist reasons, none of them were actually based on the reality of the situation, just the "reality" they had created for themselves.

I could go on and on about different Nationalist leaders, and you'd struggle to find reality there. Perhaps you're not a nationalist, but certainly I don't see you look for the truth on this UN issue.

I'm not necessarily a globalist either. I don't actually like the UN, I don't like the power the US has. In fact the reasons I don't like the UN are because the US has too much power within the UN (among many other things), and you hate the UN because you think it doesn't carry out US interests, which is completely different.

But you're telling me that the UN doesn't advance US citizens' best interests, and yet you don't appear to know what the UN does or how it actually does advance US citizens' interests.

Oh i'm sure it advances some US interests. I mean, the bulk of the funding does come from the US. And that does carry a lot of weight. But i just don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions. Our Founding Fathers would not approve.

No foreign entity should have so much influence on our nation. Because such institutions are not set up to solely advance American Citizens' best interests. It's why i no longer support the Globalist agenda. I'm an American. My focus is on advancing Americans' interests. We've gotten away from that in recent decades. It is time to start putting Americans first again. That may upset Globalists, but so be it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Well, insult me if you like. But i'm still not a Globalist. I'm only interested in advancing American Citizens' best interests. Any institution not serving that purpose, is of no interest to me.

I'm sorry if you felt insulted what I said, I certainly didn't intent any insult.

My personal belief about Nationalism is that it is about making up your own warm and fuzzy view of the world that doesn't have much to do with the truth. I didn't necessarily mean that this is your view, just that this is what Nationalism is, and you declared yourself a Nationalist.

Nationalists like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia who used a war in 1389 to go around starting wars that disrupted a whole country, saw lots of people killed, all for Nationalist reasons, none of them were actually based on the reality of the situation, just the "reality" they had created for themselves.

I could go on and on about different Nationalist leaders, and you'd struggle to find reality there. Perhaps you're not a nationalist, but certainly I don't see you look for the truth on this UN issue.

I'm not necessarily a globalist either. I don't actually like the UN, I don't like the power the US has. In fact the reasons I don't like the UN are because the US has too much power within the UN (among many other things), and you hate the UN because you think it doesn't carry out US interests, which is completely different.

But you're telling me that the UN doesn't advance US citizens' best interests, and yet you don't appear to know what the UN does or how it actually does advance US citizens' interests.

Oh i'm sure it advances some US interests. I mean, the bulk of the funding does come from the US. And that does carry a lot of weight. But i just don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions. Our Founding Fathers would not approve.

No foreign entity should have so much influence on our nation. Because such institutions are not set up to solely advance American Citizens' best interests. It's why i no longer support the Globalist agenda. I'm an American. My focus is on advancing Americans' interests. We've gotten away from that in recent decades. It is time to start putting Americans first again. That may upset Globalists, but so be it.

How do you know what the Founding Fathers wouldn't approve of? This is a strange way of looking at things. I'm sure they wouldn't approve of the current Presidential elections becoming popularity contests either, but they don't get changed and I don't see you supporting such change.

However the world exists differently to 1789 and the US finds different ways of dealing with it. You want to advance US interests by taking away a body that does advance US interests because it also advances other people's interests? So you'd weaken the US in order to make it look like the US is stronger? I don't get it.

And what do you mean by Globalism? Did you speak out against the Iraq War? Is that globalism?

 

[Dschrute3]

Because sometimes US best interests are served not through direct means. Being a permanent member of the UN security council is in the US's best interests. Personally I'd do away with this ridiculous nonsense. The UN meets in NY city, which is good for the city's economy. The US used the UN to justify the unjustifiable when invading Iraq, no US citizen ever ends up in the Hague, but smaller countries' leaders do, etc etc.

Look, if you don't know what the UN does, or how it impacts US foreign policy, that's fine, but if you're going to argue for getting rid of funding, at least find out how the UN benefits the US.

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Your delusion that we have any power over the U.N. is comical. To the extent we do, we are violating all the principles that it was founded on and that turds like you claim to believe in.

I believe the UN has too much influence over us. It's been undermining American Citizen best interests for many years. And that's because it's a foreign institution. It isn't set up to solely advance American Citizen interests.

Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. And i don't blame for that. It's to be expected. But i don't see why i should be forced to fund foreigner interests. At the very least, our Government should scale back our involvement and funding.

You believe?

Believing is all very well and good, the question is (this is after all a political forum) can you SHOW that this is the case?

Well, you're a Globalist, i'm a Nationalist. So we're just not gonna see eye to eye on this issue. That's just the reality. So you keep on fighting for your Globalist agenda, and i'll keep on fighting for my Nationalist agenda. No hard feelings.

 

[Dschrute3]

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Well, insult me if you like. But i'm still not a Globalist. I'm only interested in advancing American Citizens' best interests. Any institution not serving that purpose, is of no interest to me.

I'm sorry if you felt insulted what I said, I certainly didn't intent any insult.

My personal belief about Nationalism is that it is about making up your own warm and fuzzy view of the world that doesn't have much to do with the truth. I didn't necessarily mean that this is your view, just that this is what Nationalism is, and you declared yourself a Nationalist.

Nationalists like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia who used a war in 1389 to go around starting wars that disrupted a whole country, saw lots of people killed, all for Nationalist reasons, none of them were actually based on the reality of the situation, just the "reality" they had created for themselves.

I could go on and on about different Nationalist leaders, and you'd struggle to find reality there. Perhaps you're not a nationalist, but certainly I don't see you look for the truth on this UN issue.

I'm not necessarily a globalist either. I don't actually like the UN, I don't like the power the US has. In fact the reasons I don't like the UN are because the US has too much power within the UN (among many other things), and you hate the UN because you think it doesn't carry out US interests, which is completely different.

But you're telling me that the UN doesn't advance US citizens' best interests, and yet you don't appear to know what the UN does or how it actually does advance US citizens' interests.

Oh i'm sure it advances some US interests. I mean, the bulk of the funding does come from the US. And that does carry a lot of weight. But i just don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions. Our Founding Fathers would not approve.

No foreign entity should have so much influence on our nation. Because such institutions are not set up to solely advance American Citizens' best interests. It's why i no longer support the Globalist agenda. I'm an American. My focus is on advancing Americans' interests. We've gotten away from that in recent decades. It is time to start putting Americans first again. That may upset Globalists, but so be it.

How do you know what the Founding Fathers wouldn't approve of? This is a strange way of looking at things. I'm sure they wouldn't approve of the current Presidential elections becoming popularity contests either, but they don't get changed and I don't see you supporting such change.

However the world exists differently to 1789 and the US finds different ways of dealing with it. You want to advance US interests by taking away a body that does advance US interests because it also advances other people's interests? So you'd weaken the US in order to make it look like the US is stronger? I don't get it.

And what do you mean by Globalism? Did you speak out against the Iraq War? Is that globalism?

Our Founding Fathers would be shocked and appalled at the notion American Taxpayers are being forced to fund foreign institutions. Especially ones that don't exist for the sole purpose of advancing American Citizen interests.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Well again, i'm not a Globalist. I'm a Nationalist. I don't agree with you. The UN is a foreign institution that doesn't solely advance American Citizen interests.Therefore, i don't feel i should be forced to fund it. If you Globalists wanna fund it, feel free to contribute your own incomes. You'll have do without American Tax Dollars.

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Your delusion that we have any power over the U.N. is comical. To the extent we do, we are violating all the principles that it was founded on and that turds like you claim to believe in.

I believe the UN has too much influence over us. It's been undermining American Citizen best interests for many years. And that's because it's a foreign institution. It isn't set up to solely advance American Citizen interests.

Foreigners naturally have their own best interests in mind. And i don't blame for that. It's to be expected. But i don't see why i should be forced to fund foreigner interests. At the very least, our Government should scale back our involvement and funding.

You believe?

Believing is all very well and good, the question is (this is after all a political forum) can you SHOW that this is the case?

Well, you're a Globalist, i'm a Nationalist. So we're just not gonna see eye to eye on this issue. That's just the reality. So you keep on fighting for your Globalist agenda, and i'll keep on fighting for my Nationalist agenda. No hard feelings.

No, I'm not a globalist. I'm not an -ist at all. I don't go with a theory and then stick to it like ice cream to a kid's face. I look at the merits of things, the arguments and I make my own views.

I'm not asking you to be an -ist here. I'm not asking you to stick to your guns. I'm asking you to debate me on this. To open your eyes, to make your case but make it with facts, sources and the like. You might find that actually some of the things you believe just aren't true, you might start seeing things a little more differently and change your stance. You might not come out the same as I am, but you're putting yourself through that process of moving away from blindness and going to seeing.

But you can choose to remain what you want to be, you can choose ignorance is bliss above reality.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Ah, Nationalism, the place where you don't need to bother knowing the truth about stuff, you just make things however you want them to be.

But I'll say this again, American interests are not always served simply through direct means. Sometimes US interests are in dialogue with other nations, they are served by having a lot of power over a global body. You can't see this because you're not looking.

Well, insult me if you like. But i'm still not a Globalist. I'm only interested in advancing American Citizens' best interests. Any institution not serving that purpose, is of no interest to me.

I'm sorry if you felt insulted what I said, I certainly didn't intent any insult.

My personal belief about Nationalism is that it is about making up your own warm and fuzzy view of the world that doesn't have much to do with the truth. I didn't necessarily mean that this is your view, just that this is what Nationalism is, and you declared yourself a Nationalist.

Nationalists like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia who used a war in 1389 to go around starting wars that disrupted a whole country, saw lots of people killed, all for Nationalist reasons, none of them were actually based on the reality of the situation, just the "reality" they had created for themselves.

I could go on and on about different Nationalist leaders, and you'd struggle to find reality there. Perhaps you're not a nationalist, but certainly I don't see you look for the truth on this UN issue.

I'm not necessarily a globalist either. I don't actually like the UN, I don't like the power the US has. In fact the reasons I don't like the UN are because the US has too much power within the UN (among many other things), and you hate the UN because you think it doesn't carry out US interests, which is completely different.

But you're telling me that the UN doesn't advance US citizens' best interests, and yet you don't appear to know what the UN does or how it actually does advance US citizens' interests.

Oh i'm sure it advances some US interests. I mean, the bulk of the funding does come from the US. And that does carry a lot of weight. But i just don't support forcing American Taxpayers to fund foreign institutions. Our Founding Fathers would not approve.

No foreign entity should have so much influence on our nation. Because such institutions are not set up to solely advance American Citizens' best interests. It's why i no longer support the Globalist agenda. I'm an American. My focus is on advancing Americans' interests. We've gotten away from that in recent decades. It is time to start putting Americans first again. That may upset Globalists, but so be it.

How do you know what the Founding Fathers wouldn't approve of? This is a strange way of looking at things. I'm sure they wouldn't approve of the current Presidential elections becoming popularity contests either, but they don't get changed and I don't see you supporting such change.

However the world exists differently to 1789 and the US finds different ways of dealing with it. You want to advance US interests by taking away a body that does advance US interests because it also advances other people's interests? So you'd weaken the US in order to make it look like the US is stronger? I don't get it.

And what do you mean by Globalism? Did you speak out against the Iraq War? Is that globalism?

Our Founding Fathers would be shocked and appalled at the notion American Taxpayers are being forced to fund foreign institutions. Especially ones that don't exist for the sole purpose of advancing American Citizen interests.

Why would they be?

 

[there4eyeM]

All U.S. government funding begins in the democratically elected House of Representatives. Taxation through representation is not forcing.

Yeah it is, asshole. If two wolves and a sheep vote on what to have for dinner, is the sheep volunteering to become the main course?

Typical nonsensical response from this offensive, foul-mouth poster.