Thread: The war in Iraq...again

Pakistan has been the largest contributor of UN forces for many years now, but here's the rundown from last year.

Quote
The 10 main troop-contributing countries to UN peacekeeping operations as of March 2007 were Pakistan (10,173), Bangladesh (9,675), India (9,471), Nepal (3,626), Jordan (3,564), Uruguay (2,583), Italy (2,539), Ghana, Nigeria and France.

Yes, but thats because our troops have been diverted elsewhere lately....I wonder what the data says from before 2000....I'd look it up, but personally, i'm too damned lazy and have work in a few hours.
Also, I wonder what we supply to the UN as far as supplies and relief-aid are concerned....

And personally? I think discussing whether or not the war was started on good terms isn't worth arguing....now it's all about pulling out. I'm glad we have some agreement on here about how pulling out cold turkey would cripple Iraq...and that we need to stay and help support the infrastructure.
Hell, we STILL have troops in germany....and that was over 50 years ago! (but they're not really there as infrastructure support anymore)
The rallying cry of some political candidates is "BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!" when in reality, I'm sure they know very well we will have troops there for a very long time....and they will need protection from more troops....and basically, we just need the amount of force there that we have for the moment...


Also, Jabberwock, don't feel like you need to just not post...just be careful with how you phrase things.

Jesus is right, and thanks again for calling me out spaz :P I needed that kick in the ass, unfortunately.



Pakistan, if I remember correctly, pays nearly all of its UN dues through peacekeeping forces, and they've been the leader in that regard for over a decade unless I'm mistaken. They contribute roughly 14.5% of peacekeeping operations today. There's even a story about Pakistani, and Malaysian peacekeepers bailing out a number of doomed U.S. Rangers in Somalia, 1993. The images broadcast of dead US troops being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu were from this event.


Here's what I could find on the US...

The U.S. is the largest contributor to the UN peacekeeping budget -- providing roughly a quarter of the total cost to operate all peacekeeping missions.

The U.S. provides military training and logistical support for peacekeeping operations.

The U.S. works closely with other UN Member States to ensure peacekeeping mission mandates are clear, credible, limited to what is achievable, and that peacekeeping personnel are properly prepared, able to defend themselves, and able to fulfill their mandate.

Currently, the United States provides military observers and UN police for eight peacekeeping missions: Liberia (UNMIL), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC), Sudan (UNMIS), Ethiopia/Eritrea (UNMEE), Haiti (MINUSTAH), Timor-Leste (UNMIT), the Middle East (UNTSO), and Kosovo (UNMIK).

In recent years, the United States has taken a leading role in urging the UN to take preventive measures in response to several reports of sexual exploitation and abuse involving UN peacekeeping personnel.

From- http://www.state.gov/p/io/pkpg/



Here's a report that goes roughly over all US contributions, direct and indirect for fiscal years 1996-2001, all in 2001 dollars. Worth a read if you have the time. From 1996-2001, about 250 million was spent by the US on their own troops, civilian police, and civilians under the authority of UN peacekeeping forces. One blue helmet roughly equals $1,000 a month in contributions from what I've read. The truth of the matter is that western or wealthy countries largely backed away from sending troops around the early '90's in favor of monetary contributions. The five permanent members of the security council (US, GB, China, France, Russia) contributed 2,802 troops combined last date I found. (2004)

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d02294.pdf


As for the mention earlier of Darfur, the number of UN peacekeepers is supposed to be boosted to 21,000 by the end of the year. We'll see how that goes for now, and hope for the best, I guess

Oh yeah... I do feel debating the start of the war is worthwhile, as it reflects not only on those of the current US administration who made possible errors, but more importantly on the fact that blind devotion to a cause, just because one's government supports it, is suspect.


Now.... Down to business...

Where are these women I keep hearing about? :P