ShareThis Page

Another fleecing: Kiss the U.N. goodbye

| Friday, Jan. 29, 2010

Once every three years the United States has the opportunity to demand fairness in what it pays in "dues" to the United Nations. This time the U.S. was shafted but good.

This is how the Obama administration watches out for American taxpayers: allowing a den of reprobate nations to set the scale for what the U.S. outrageously pays -- and without so much as a peep of protest.

Oh, the U.S. assessment for Turtle Bay's regular budget -- 22 percent -- remains unchanged. That's of little consolation, considering U.N. budget increases will inevitably cost the U.S. millions more.

Meanwhile China, among other nations, is ridiculously undercharged; Beijing's share of the U.N.'s regular budget this year is 3.189 percent, according to the Xinhua News Agency.

Bad as the U.N. budget deal is, the U.S. share of the world body's peacekeeping fund is even worse. The U.S. share will go up 1.21 percent this year and 1.18 percent in 2011 and 2012. So what• Those increases in a multibillion-dollar budget will cost U.S. taxpayers approximately $100 million more annually over the next three years, notes U.N. watchdog Brett D. Schaefer of The Heritage Foundation.

All this without more meaningful say in an organization that delights in ridiculing the U.S. And who can blame the U.N. for doing so -- when the U.S. so graciously enables its own fleecing.

So, let us once again repeat what we've been saying for years :

The United States should spearhead the formation of a League of Democracies, leave the U.N., and leave its corrupt, money-sucking and thug-coddling ways behind. And the sooner the better. The United Nations has been playing the United States for suckers for far too long and with our money. Enough really is enough.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.