View Single Post
  #16  
Old 04-13-2010, 07:41 AM
headquarters's Avatar
headquarters headquarters is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Norways weather beaten coasts
Posts: 1,825
Default Again,I disagree

Quote:
Originally Posted by waiting4something View Post
The U.N. likes to destroy surplus ammo that could be sold to the U.S. They don't really like our 2nd Amendment. I remember there was this Great UN Gun Debate between this U.N. lady Rebecca Peters and the NRA's Wayne Lapierre that really shows the true colors well. Do I think the U.N. can meddle in U.S. affairs? Yes. Especially when backed with a lot of money, or rich or powerful Americans that agree with these jokers. Actually all calibers are high priced now days, not just military ones. As far as buying ammo first why? I mean I would rather have a club then bullets to throw by hand at people. That is part of the strategy. Get the people to become ok with it. Then take a little more, and a little more, and so on.
I do not think there are any actual grounds for this statement.

I do not think there is any way to substantiate that the UN actively opposes the US constitution.(2nd amendment in particular ).

Rebecca Peters is not in any capacity working for the UN.(Googled her ).She is part of an Australian anti gun lobby organization and an international NGO in the same field.

The idea that the UN is after the 2nd amendment I think you would be hard pressed to find any facts on .
The fact that many wealthy Americans back antigun legislation and organizations is a domestic issue in the US and nothing to do with the UN whatsoever.

Again -if the UN actually destroys ammo we are talking stockpiles in warzones etc to keep from fuelling further war.I cannot see that there is anythig to suggest that the UN would buy and subsequently destroy ammo to keep it from reaching the US markets.

The US can veto any and all direct actions against any sovereign state in the security council hearings (where it is a permanent member) ,meaning that any formal action like war,blockade,sanctions ,wording of important documents etc has to be approved by the US .If Washington doesnt like-its not going to happen.

In my view the US is the one dictating the UN and not the other way around.The US could pull the plug on the whole UN by refusing to pay its yearly monetary contribution and pressuring a few other key states to back out of the organization.Poof ! UN reduced to a discussion club with no funding and would defacto collaps in less than a year.Or at least loose all legitimacy.

As for ammoprizes - I agree that they are high and would wish i could get mine cheaper.But the price of rawmaterials,labour and the general demand are to blame for the prices.