The United Nations General Assembly passed a $4.17 billion budget for 2008-09 with the United States casting the only vote against because of provisions for a conference it sees as anti-Israeli. In the vote early on Saturday, following a session lasting most of the night, the assembly voted 142-1 for the two-year budget, which was slightly short of the $4.2 billion requested by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. Addressing a budgetary committee meeting before the vote by the full assembly, U.S. envoy Mark Wallace said Washington opposed the budget because it contained funding for a follow-up to a 2001 racism conference in Durban, South Africa. http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnN23311745.html
And where are the UN troops in Afghanistan? Where are the UN troops in Iraq? Where oh where are any troops where they are needed?
Well, since the USA pays the majority of the UN budget, it's not surprising that the US wants it to be used for things that aren't inherently contrary to its foreign policy. ~String
Avoiding unnecessary wars and expense (and imminent bankruptcy and recession)? Disinclined to waste innocent lives in a BIG MISTAKE? More sensible than the US?
The UN will only go in for humanitarian assistance and peacekeeping, until the US pulls out, there can be neither.
