> Going forward, the U.S. government will continue its global health leadership through existing and new engagements directly with other countries, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, and faith-based entities. U.S.-led efforts will prioritize emergency response, biosecurity coordination, and health innovation to protect America first while delivering benefits to partners around the world.
The funny thing about this administration is that they label existing system as "bad" and "corrupt", use that as justification to abandon it, and then proceed to recreate the same thing different way.
You think they will actually replace it with something similar though. They won't. They have no desire to do that. Even in name. Just like all their other supposed plans - it's just smoke and mirrors and no one will actually do any such thing.
I dunno, reading it in context of the whole statement, "...and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states" deserves a bit of focus. The UN is structurally designed to give China and Russia outsized influence. Coordinating technical matters like healthcare through the UN does seem a bit unwise given that everyone is posturing up for some sort of Cold-war or potential WWIII style scenario. I don't think we've seen much deescalation of tension in the last decade.
Better to leave the bandwidth of the UN free to focus on diplomacy without distractions, the military situation is urgent.
> Coordinating technical matters like healthcare through the UN does seem a bit unwise given that everyone is posturing up for some sort of Cold-war or potential WWIII style scenario.
On the contrary, the fact that we have to coordinate technical matters like healthcare through the UN is a large part of the reason why the Cold War remained cold and we had WW2 within 20 years of WW1 but no WW3 in the 80 years since.
Until the US decided to re-elect a literal madman, the necessity of coordinating on technical matters was obvious to all, which meant these countries weee constantly talking, building relationships and communicating with each other which helped prevent minor conflagrations from escalating.
> The UN is structurally designed to give China and Russia outsized influence.
An interesting assertion. I presume you are implying outsized influence over the US (or do you mean every other country?). I'm honestly curious: can you describe this structural design?
> proceed to recreate the same thing different way
Not a same or similar thing in any way. Everything that is being torn down is being replaced by grifter schemes where all that money is funneled to personal pockets.
These church-owned entities in Germany are almost 100% government fincanced [1], while abusing a loophole in the German constitution to discriminate their employees for religious reasons. For example, the Catholic ones are notorious for firing employees that get divorced. This system is an absolute disgrace, but the churches are still too powerful in German society and have so far been able to block any attempt at fixing the constitution.
I am not fine with government funds being used to support "prayer" as a means to a more healthy end. In fact I think this arguably violates the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
This is extremely disappointing all-around. The World Health Organization was at the forefront of sounding the alarm about COVID-19 early on, and was one of the first to start preparing for the eventuality that it would spread beyond it's origin point. While most people in the US were still saying it wasn't airborne, and downplaying the spread potential and health effects of COVID, the WHO was sounding the alarm on that, too. Ah yes. A little satire does the heart good, you know?
I agree there is only so much an organization can do After the spread, countries themselves have to take action in behalf of the organization's directions and procedures. The U.S. at the time took way too long to act, this was a fact, clearly why some governors were in a tweeting match and arguments over this issue. I do not agree with this direction. Clearly there is alternative motive behind this amongst the multiple other useless withdraws and steps taking at this time.
Readit News
The funny thing about this administration is that they label existing system as "bad" and "corrupt", use that as justification to abandon it, and then proceed to recreate the same thing different way.
Better to leave the bandwidth of the UN free to focus on diplomacy without distractions, the military situation is urgent.
On the contrary, the fact that we have to coordinate technical matters like healthcare through the UN is a large part of the reason why the Cold War remained cold and we had WW2 within 20 years of WW1 but no WW3 in the 80 years since.
Until the US decided to re-elect a literal madman, the necessity of coordinating on technical matters was obvious to all, which meant these countries weee constantly talking, building relationships and communicating with each other which helped prevent minor conflagrations from escalating.
An interesting assertion. I presume you are implying outsized influence over the US (or do you mean every other country?). I'm honestly curious: can you describe this structural design?
Not a same or similar thing in any way. Everything that is being torn down is being replaced by grifter schemes where all that money is funneled to personal pockets.
Look, believe what you want, but praying literally has no known demonstrable deterministic scientific or medical effect on people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficacy_of_prayer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malteser_Hilfsdienst_e.V.
[1] https://www.malteser-international.org/en/about-us/how-we-wo...
Deleted Comment
I am not fine with government funds being used to support "prayer" as a means to a more healthy end. In fact I think this arguably violates the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
Dead Comment