Leaked U.S. to U.N. Members Memo

April 4, 2003 9:48 AM

Friday Doublethink Fun. "An extraordinary communication from the United States to UN representatives around the world has been leaked to Greenpeace. In it, the U.S. warns that the simple act of support for a General Assembly meeting to discuss the war will be considered 'unhelpful and directed against the U.S.'"

But really now, do we actually expect the U.S. (which claims it fights to "democratize" the Middle East) to welcome discourse and listen to what the majority of the world may think?
posted by fold_and_mutilate (24 comments total)

Why do you hate America so much?
posted by jonson at 9:59 AM on April 4, 2003

I think it's mind bogglingly obvious that the current administration wouldn't want to see the UN debate the merits of the war in Iraq. Everyone knows this. Leaked memo??? Only a naive cave dweller would need a leaked memo to know that the Bush administration doesn't want UN debate on this.

How is this extraordinary? Other than extraordinarily clumsy agenda wielding?
posted by y6y6y6 at 10:02 AM on April 4, 2003

ugh flame fodder

Actually it says "the U.S. would consider a General Assembly session on Iraq as unhelpful and as directed against the US" it doesn't "warn against supporting"

small but siginificant difference.
posted by bitdamaged at 10:06 AM on April 4, 2003

Why do you hate America so much?

I hate all continents. They're too big. Bloody continents.

Should be small.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 10:06 AM on April 4, 2003

This came out days after the war started and the wording is pretty much specific they don't want the UN to act against the USA. It's pretty specific. If the UN voted against the US actions in Iraq it would be obligated to send troops to do something about it or else face illegitimacy. All of this is common sense. If anything this just exposes the UN for what it is, ineffectual.
posted by stbalbach at 10:07 AM on April 4, 2003

This would be great! The Arab League call for a resolution, and "Then its time for everybody to put their cards on the table." No more "secret coalition" members.

Then the United States can either obey the UN, or become the same kind of "criminals" they accused Iraq of being, and ignore UN resolutions.

Why do you beat your wife?
posted by Perigee at 10:12 AM on April 4, 2003

Why do you hate America so much?

Noone's saying...why do you...*sputter sputter*...oh never mind. You're right: constructive criticism = hatred. We hate our children, parents, friends and coworkers, in addition to America. What a world.
posted by freebird at 10:15 AM on April 4, 2003

If anything this just exposes the UN for what it is, ineffectual.

mission accomplished, then?
posted by mcsweetie at 10:18 AM on April 4, 2003

Friday Doublethink Fun

Can't stand the thought that not everyone is focused in on your tedious agenda?
posted by MrBaliHai at 11:23 AM on April 4, 2003

You're right: constructive criticism = hatred.

Cool down, freebird (There's a sentence I've never uttered before!). I think jonson was just riffing on this post-Sept 11th meme.

Shit post, btw.
posted by dhoyt at 11:23 AM on April 4, 2003

post-Sept 11th meme.

I should be slapped for using that phrase.
posted by dhoyt at 11:29 AM on April 4, 2003

dhoyt - SHHH! Don't give it away, the joke is much funnier when people wildly over-react.
posted by jonson at 11:30 AM on April 4, 2003

my bad
posted by dhoyt at 11:48 AM on April 4, 2003

But really now, do we actually expect the U.S. (which claims it fights to "democratize" the Middle East) to welcome discourse and listen to what the majority of the world may think?

I think you already have your own answer, so why did you ask this question?
posted by angry modem at 12:08 PM on April 4, 2003

angry_modem: You may not have heard of it, but it's called a rhetorical question. I've heard that they can be quite effective.
posted by daveg at 12:39 PM on April 4, 2003

Awww, this wasn't up to foldy's standards, now was it.

He'll be back though!
posted by Dennis Murphy at 12:41 PM on April 4, 2003

I've heard that they [rhetorical questions] can be quite effective.

Yes, for example just take a look at all the great conversation this post has spawned thanks to foldy's graceless rhetoric and utterly transparent agenda.

Ironic that he asks, "do we actually expect the U.S....to welcome discourse and listen..", when he never *ever* sticks around long enough in a thread to encourage discourse or listen to the other side of a discussion. Priceless.
posted by dhoyt at 12:47 PM on April 4, 2003

Do I know what rhetorical means?
posted by Samsonov14 at 1:16 PM on April 4, 2003

daveg: You may not have heard of it, but it's called a sarcasm. I've heard that it can be quite hard for some to spot.
posted by y6y6y6 at 1:21 PM on April 4, 2003

y6y6y6: Actually, I'm English, so sarcasm, irony, pathos and even litotes are as second nature to me.
posted by daveg at 1:31 PM on April 4, 2003

Wait! Wait! You're attacking to poster and not the post!

Oh, hold on...that's what he wants. Carry on.
posted by Cyrano at 2:01 PM on April 4, 2003

daveg, he's no fool. If he could only grasp logos and lend foldy some ethos, we might actually get somewhere.
posted by David Dark at 2:53 PM on April 4, 2003

Why do you hate America so much?
posted by homunculus at 3:40 PM on April 4, 2003

logos... ethos... All I see are pathos, pathos and pathos.

Hrm... and why so hard on this post? Seems like a significant issue to me given the Administrations recently denied accusations of trying to buy coalition members. Now we are trying to threaten nations who don't support us into shutting up. If you read the fax it is more "... with us or against us.." rhetoric.

I'm almost as tired of that kind of talk as I am of waking up in the morning and realizing that not only have I been paying for cruise missles that are killing people right now for the last several years, but that I will continue to pay for them under penalty of imprisonment for many years to come.
posted by n9 at 5:50 AM on April 5, 2003