Bush to give farewell address to UN General Assembly

[Praxius]

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/09/23/un-assembly.html

U.S. President George W. Bush was expected to speak on Tuesday about the need for multinational diplomacy in his final address to the UN General Assembly in New York.

Bush, who has often criticized the UN over the past seven years, was scheduled to speak for 15 minutes as a new session of the assembly gets underway.

Other speakers at the UN on Tuesday include French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In the past, Bush has said the UN bureaucracy is costly and huge and the UN itself is indecisive in the face of serious world problems.

Ahmadinejad spoke to the UN last year, but his presence caused a stir with thousands protesting outside the building. The U.S. delegation walked out when he rose to speak.

Ahmadinejad told National Public Radio in the U.S. in an interview to be broadcast on Tuesday that he is not interested in having a confrontation with the U.S. and would like diplomatic relations to improve between the two countries.

"We do not have confrontations with anyone," he said. "The U.S. administration interferes, and we defend ourselves."

Ahmadinejad, however, said at a military parade on Sunday that Iran would defend itself were any country to attack its nuclear facilities.

"If anyone allows himself to commit even a tiny offence against Iran's legitimate interests, borders and sacred land, our armed forces will break his hand before he pulls the trigger," he said.

The vice-president of Sudan and leaders from Georgia, Lebanon, Kenya, Somalia, France, Liberia and Argentina are also among those to address the General Assembly on Tuesday.

Sounds like it'll be an interesting soap opera.

 

[#juan]

The U.S. doesn't like the UN because they can't run it like they do NATO. One of the good reasons to keep the UN going.

 

[lone wolf]

I bet there won't be a dry eye in the place....

 

[Avro]

I'm sure the UN will give Bush a good riddance send off.:lol:

 

[Unforgiven]

It's takes 15 minutes to day "So long suckers." ???
No wonder the UN takes so long to do anything.

 

[Praxius]

After Bush is done with his speech, the UN should handcuff him and give him the ol' Simpsons' Australian punishment of the big boot in the ass..... only boot his ass out the door and tell him never to come back again.

"naw.... it's just a kick in tha bum...."

 

[Praxius]

Oh and here's the part I was missing to my last post:

 

[earth_as_one]

Most of the UN see Bush as a war criminal.

Februray 18, 2003

SECURITY COUNCIL HEARS 27 SPEAKERS IN DEBATE ON IRAQ’S DISARMAMENT;

MAJORITY SUPPORT STRENGTHENED INSPECTIONS, OPPOSE USE OF FORCE



The ongoing debate on how to proceed on disarming Iraq continued this afternoon, as the Security Council, in a follow-up to last week’s briefing by the United Nations chief weapons inspectors, convened an open meeting to hear from non-Council members, and heard a broad majority of the 27 speakers support strengthened inspections and oppose the use of military force.



On Friday, the Executive Chairman of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), Hans Blix, and the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei, had reported that Iraq’s cooperation on procedural matters had recently improved and they had not found any weapons of mass destruction...

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7665.doc.htm

March 26, 2003
SECURITY COUNCIL HOLDS FIRST DEBATE ON IRAQ SINCE START OF MILITARY ACTION;

SPEAKERS CALL FOR HALT TO AGGRESSION, IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL

Secretary-General Says Council Must Rediscover Its Unity of Purpose

The Security Council, holding its first debate on Iraq since hostilities began on 19 March, was called on to end the illegal aggression and demand the immediate withdrawal of invading forces, by an overwhelming majority of this afternoon’s 45 speakers.

Expressing regret that diplomacy had failed to resolve the question of Iraq’s disarmament, speakers emphasized that the current war, carried out without Council authorization, was a violation of international law and the United Nations Charter. Many stressed they could not understand how the Council could remain silent in the face of the aggression by two of its permanent members against another United Nations Member State....

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/sc7705.doc.htm