UN. .. Why is mine different... UN Why is mine different
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (72)
[ 72 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#1 - shameonapony
Reply +80 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Why is mine different...
User avatar #51 to #1 - lordvimless
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
look closely at the c and e on the top on. its photoshopped
User avatar #33 to #1 - carneymaster
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
cause its the original.
User avatar #2 to #1 - thenukecity
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Because you don't have an agenda?
#3 - Cleavland Steamer
Reply +43 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Also 'Un' involved in peace
<----------------
User avatar #4 to #3 - hamburgerss
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
holy ****, I see what you did there
User avatar #15 to #3 - yodaddysofat
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
unless it's a "piece" of cake
#5 - artyommetro
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
#17 to #5 - pronak
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Yes, there is, this is going to my Facebook.
#25 - gibroner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
#46 to #25 - anon id: 07d138af
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
They are not supposed to fight, that's why the retreat.
Anyway they don't shoot, so they can't hit their allies (Something to learn, America)
#72 to #25 - anon id: 7eb7abb2
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/28/2013) [-]
Everyone seems to forget that all UN Peacekeepers are primarily members of their own national military forces, so by knocking the Peacekeepers, you're knocking yourselves.
User avatar #34 to #25 - ruebezahl
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Well, UN peacekeepers have still been at least as useful as American troops, which left behind a complete mess in practically every country they have entered since 1945.
User avatar #36 to #34 - gibroner
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
most of the time those countries were pretty ****** to begin with then the U.S. came in and just made it worse or the same amount of ****** just a different type of ******
User avatar #44 to #36 - ruebezahl
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Frankly, if I were a normal average Joe (or Ali) in Iraq, someone who is not politically interested, then I would say that my country went from "not so bad" to "pretty damn ******" since the US came in.

Yes, I know that many Americans think that people lived in utter poverty in clay huts and in fear of getting shot for no reason when Saddam Hussein ruled Iraq or that everyone's top priority is democracy, but neither of these assumptions is correct.

You could also ask the non-brainwashed people in North Korea how useful America was in the Korean war. Or ask someone from Vietnam how helpful the involvement of America in their country was. The message of your posting was that the UN peacekeepers are useless. Well, the same is true for American troops since 1945.
User avatar #45 to #44 - gibroner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
okay... I'm not saying otherwise and I don't know why you felt the need to bring that up I was talking about the U.N. Peacekeepers
User avatar #37 to #36 - figosound
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
That should be better?
User avatar #39 to #37 - gibroner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
I'm not saying it's right I'm just saying it's not like they go into Utopian societies and turn them into third world countries
User avatar #40 to #39 - figosound
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Ok, but what's the point of it all?
User avatar #41 to #40 - gibroner
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
**** if I know
#38 - figosound
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Old as Teh Internets.
User avatar #7 - Flammenwerfer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if UN troops/peacekeepers are deployed, is it true that they aren't allowed to actually use their weapons?
User avatar #8 to #7 - meganinja
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
I think they're allowed to shoot at the ground, but not at people, even in life-threatening situations. Just sounds like a buncha panzys to me.
User avatar #11 to #8 - vicesvipers
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Thats not true at all
User avatar #19 to #11 - meganinja
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Oh I watched a documentary about the Tutsi **** in Rwanda in Civics class and they said that the UN could only shoot at the feet. Maybe it was just for that occasion, since they didn't want to make the locals hostile to them.
User avatar #21 to #19 - hudis
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Well, Rwanda was a fiasco and pretty much an exception, I'd say. They may never admit it much but I'll bet the UN isn't very proud of how they handled that crisis.
#28 to #21 - anon id: 0b50276a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Excuse my french, but that is ********. Rwanda was not a UN fiasco but the way that the UN Security Council approached the issue and wasted so much time which could have been used to save so many lives, THAT is the fiasco.
User avatar #30 to #28 - hudis
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
That's what I meant. Apologies that I was unclear.
User avatar #31 to #8 - ruebezahl
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Really? Who has more courage? The person who shoots directly at someone who attacks them or the person who shoots at the ground?

Killing someone never takes courage.
User avatar #71 to #31 - meganinja
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
I didn't say that didn't have courage.
#9 to #7 - anon id: 96f7fa45
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
UN Peacekeepers are basically useless. If they are ever in any danger, or a war is a about to happen, their country just pulls them back.
User avatar #12 to #9 - vicesvipers
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Thats untrue...they are usually in war areas
User avatar #27 to #12 - unicornswag
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Thats true. But mostly after the actual battle (not war). They're just there to look blue.
User avatar #18 to #7 - sorrybut
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
You must be new to this world.
User avatar #13 to #7 - tittystargalactica
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Peacekeeping means shooting at the people that are ruining the peace until they're not there any more.

User avatar #23 to #13 - slapchoppin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
when my father was a peacekeeper they occasionally didn't let them have any ammo in their guns but they might have changed that
User avatar #43 to #23 - tittystargalactica
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
Oh really? That's interesting.

They might do the same sort of thing as guards do outside palaces etc. Maybe their presence is enough to calm people and stop trouble.

Thanks for the information dude
#35 - deansg
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
We can't really be surprised this happens when as soon as some Western country gets involved somewhere the entire world screams at them. David Cameron spoke today about how there are war crimes taking place in Syria, but at the same time he doesn't want military involvement... typical
We can't really be surprised this happens when as soon as some Western country gets involved somewhere the entire world screams at them. David Cameron spoke today about how there are war crimes taking place in Syria, but at the same time he doesn't want military involvement... typical
User avatar #32 - aconfuseddonut
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
The original said Uninvolved in Africa...
User avatar #26 - commanderbunbun
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
i can spell out "nazi" with bananas
#6 - plasmodesmata
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/26/2013) [-]
"UN involved in Peace," good for them.
[ 72 comments ]
Leave a comment