Kofi Annan: Should He Resign?

[The Warden]

Oil-For-Food

Haiti

Congo

Sudan

North Korea

etc.

 

Should he still have his job after being an absolute failure with these and other "actions," or should he be allowed to put his reform plan into place?

 

FOX Thingy

296609[/snapback]

 

What difference would it make ?

 

The UN bureuacracy is almost as bad as the US Congress

 

Just kick them (UN) off the East Side and build the Jets a 60,000 open seat stadium (with bleachers) for the "true" fans - on the site.

 

Look what NYC will make on the parking/towing !

 

No more "diplomaniac" status

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Get US out of the UN.

 

NOW.

 

It's inane that we the American taxpayer should fund an institution dedicated to blocking our national security.

[KRC]

It's the "buck stop here" mentality that has gone the way of the dodo.

 

Anan can shrug his shoulders and claim he wasn't aware of this problem or that irregularity, but ultimately, he's in charge, it's his job to know.  And if there is a multitude of serious problems like what the UN has endured under his watch, there needs to be a change. 

 

I'm not saying I don't believe him when he says he was unaware of the problems (ie, he may not be directly responsible for them), but I'm saying it's a matter of accountability - put simply- he's the boss, and we're talking about major issues over the course of several years, not just one isolated incident.

296890[/snapback]

 

I may be misinterpreting your statements, but you seem to be focusing on just the Oil-For-Food thingy. What about the little to no effective actions regarding Haiti, the Sudan, the Congo, North Korea, Iran, etc?

[Campy]

I may be misinterpreting your statements, but you seem to be focusing on just the Oil-For-Food thingy. What about the little to no effective actions regarding Haiti, the Sudan, the Congo, North Korea, Iran, etc?

297139[/snapback]

No, you interpretation was accurate. There are alot of issues where I think the UN is right, and there are just as many where I disagree - And then there are probably an equal amount where I'm not exactly sure what I think the UN could (or even should) do.

 

But the abuses in the Oil-for-Food program should be enough for every member-nation to say it's time for a change. Politics are politics, but thievery is thievery.

[KRC]

No, you interpretation was accurate.  There are alot of issues where I think the UN is right, and there are just as many where I disagree - And then there are probably an equal amount where I'm not exactly sure what I think the UN could (or even should) do. 

 

But the abuses in the Oil-for-Food program should be enough for every member-nation to say it's time for a change.  Politics are politics, but thievery is thievery.

297184[/snapback]

 

There is no question that he needs to go over the Oil-For-Food thingy, but the other items I mentioned were to convince the people on the fence about his leadership. I am trying to think of the last international crisis where he was effective? This is where the UN is supposed to be effective, and I haven't seen anything. Hell, even with aid programs for the tsunami, they readily admitted that they are not equiped to handle it. What good are they if they:

 

1) cannot handle a humanitarian crisis

2) cannot handle a political crisis

3) cannot handle terrorism

4) cannot/will not handle WMD issues