Submitted by Worldly_Pirate_9817 t3_znwkfz in news
Comments
niceguybadboy t1_j0jlqy1 wrote
Maybe she just wants to take a break.
[deleted] t1_j0jluwo wrote
[deleted]
zepprith t1_j0jlzhg wrote
In the article it says she intends to work with local groups and her issue is the UN isn't doing enough to enforce the laws of war that forbid attacks against civilians.
Going on further that the UN tips in favor of power countries like Russia at the expensive of innocent people. So its more she doesn't want to be apart of a organization that just allows powerful countries to do whatever they want.
lurq_king t1_j0jm1mt wrote
Did you even read the article?
> After 20 years working within the U.N. system I feel it is time for me to work differently, engaging directly with refugees and local organizations, and supporting their advocacy for solutions," Jolie said
Em_Adespoton t1_j0jm58r wrote
Well, for one thing, UNHCR has seemed to be much better at sending me junk mail than in actually getting housing and support to refugee claimants or helping them through the claim process.
If she uses her existing fame and wealth to directly influence the process and provide support for a limited number of claimants, that will be an improvement on the current situation.
It must be frustrating for UNHCR employees too, because I’m sure they’re doing everything they can to make the system work… it just isn’t.
niceguybadboy t1_j0jn4nx wrote
Read the article? Are you crazy?.
[deleted] t1_j0jn9ef wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j0jr1gp wrote
thunderingparcel t1_j0jyc43 wrote
She’s about to bust out a face melting keyboard solo.
thunderingparcel t1_j0jyeyd wrote
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. That’s a hilarious joke that isn’t making fun of or hurting anyone.
MadDjinn t1_j0k4fq0 wrote
So she’s finally gotten past the 14 yr olds ideological view of the UN?
Finally realizing it’s not actually a government nor a power that can do shit?
zepprith t1_j0k4pr6 wrote
I mean it isn't a government but it can still be used as a forum to organize a response against a nation breaking international laws.
[deleted] t1_j0k6aae wrote
[removed]
noncongruent t1_j0k6h02 wrote
I will note that she's only 47, so she's done this for over two-thirds her adult life.
NaturalOutcome3154 t1_j0k8scx wrote
I know someone who went to Uganda on a church mission to build water wells in some local villages about 6 years ago. Very long story, short- in the beginning of November I asked him if he ever heard from the people he met on his journey to Uganda. Turns out he kept in-touch with several. Not one ever asked him for money. We figured out how to safely make a difference in their communities with local people we trust. We are normal people. Someone with her connections and ability to travel and oversee projects makes her incredibly valuable. I love she’s going solo. Can’t wait to see what someone like her does. She’s interesting.
FunkySphinx t1_j0k9j4q wrote
>It must be frustrating for UNHCR employees too, because I’m sure they’re doing everything they can to make the system work… it just isn’t.
Depending on the country, the backlog may not actually be UNHCR's fault. In most countries, it has an advisory/supportive role (or no role at all) when it comes to processing asylum claims. In countries with no or limited capacity, it may be responsible for the process with some support from the government.
threeleggedgirl t1_j0kat1t wrote
What do you do to better the world? You seem to have strong opinions about how other people do it.
Interesting_Total_98 t1_j0kdi8z wrote
The main purpose of the organization is for the most powerful nations to talk to each other. Kicking any of them out would go against this, but I get why she doesn't want to be a part of it.
Accomplished_Role977 t1_j0kgaau wrote
I always found it a bit perverted, the pictures of her reaching out with her anorexic arms to the starving children…
JustNoNoISaid t1_j0kgtbn wrote
She bowin'
She bowin'
An' she out
9780190752224 t1_j0khl1x wrote
good on her. the UN are fucking spineless. literally thousands of civilians' deaths are on their hands due to their inaction
sector3011 t1_j0kierd wrote
Did Angelina Jolie somehow forget the US ignored the UN to invade Iraq? The UN has never been able to enforce laws of war nor was it founded with this intention.
Jammyhobgoblin t1_j0kl23y wrote
I know it sounds silly, but watching the movie Hotel Rwanda (and subsequently looking into what happened) was what made me lose faith in the UN.
Motor_Bit_7678 t1_j0knpoq wrote
Excellent decision no point supporting a organization when one is a terrorist supporting state and some other complicit all forgeting and ignoring the laws they created.
[deleted] t1_j0knq27 wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j0kqr6d wrote
[deleted]
rubywpnmaster t1_j0kr5uj wrote
And yet the UN has never declared the war illegal. Funny how that works.
You also have to keep in mind public sentiment of the UN at that time was pretty low. And the arguments that the invasion was legal are not completely without merit either.
[deleted] t1_j0ktylq wrote
[removed]
Captcha_Imagination t1_j0kx6i3 wrote
Sometimes you have to quit a job to call it a joke. That seems to be what she is doing.
cchiu23 t1_j0kzz35 wrote
>And the arguments that the invasion was legal are not completely without merit either.
Citation needed
Also the UN hasn't done that with the russian invasion either (pretty sure there isn't really a legal mechanism to declar a war "illegal)
>And yet the UN has never declared the war illegal. Funny how that works.
That's the perk of being the most powerful country that the OP mentioned
[deleted] t1_j0l2rnr wrote
[removed]
mariah_a t1_j0l2x07 wrote
What a weird comment. A woman whose body is constantly criticised does amazing things for people and you make it all about her body again.
rochvegas5 t1_j0l4ogd wrote
What? A letter strongly condemning illegal actions isn’t good enough?
ItchyDoggg t1_j0l4r8o wrote
The only thing a bit perverted about what you described was your own reaction, but go on and keep telling on yourself.
[deleted] t1_j0laivx wrote
[removed]
Souse-in-the-city t1_j0lcd2l wrote
How would the UN enforce these laws if local groups just tell them to fuck off?
What does she advocate?
Sanctions?
Military intervention akin to Kosovo?
Souse-in-the-city t1_j0lcohf wrote
Do you mean Hezbollah or that mini Khabib guy?
[deleted] t1_j0lcu46 wrote
[removed]
LeicaM6guy t1_j0ldza4 wrote
International Human Rights major checking in: one of the most depressing things about this subject is learning how toothless it can be.
RosaLuxembourg2 t1_j0lekqr wrote
Yeah dude WW3 would absolutely result in less deaths. Great observation. I hope I die in the initial blasts and dont have to cosplay THREADS.
[deleted] t1_j0lgp9m wrote
[deleted]
inconspiciousdude t1_j0lkagy wrote
>Citation needed
"I am the law" (Dredd et. al, 2134).
canada432 t1_j0llr2f wrote
This deserves repeating because people seem to have real difficulty grasping the concept. The UN is not a world government, it's not a police force, it's not an army. It's a diplomatic forum for discussion to prevent another world war. The UN isn't an exclusive club that people get kicked out of, it's a conference room where countries can talk.
[deleted] t1_j0lm0ir wrote
[removed]
thetasigma_1355 t1_j0lo32v wrote
Small, well funded, efforts are much more agile than massive bureaucracies. Additionally, organizations like the UN have to consider broader situations and enforce some degree of fairness. Trying to bring entire nations out of poverty is a generational task that likely won’t succeed. Trying to bring specific communities out of poverty is a multi-year task which has a real chance to work.
Further, picking and choosing which communities fail and which get the multi-year support is a challenge for government bureaucracies. Helping zero communities equally is a better political solution than helping a few.
Smaller groups don’t have to deal nearly so much with the politics or bureaucracies and thus can have more impactful change.
TotalChaosRush t1_j0lqmaw wrote
There's a bit of a disconnect. Most people are increasingly use to the rules of social media, where if you're calling for the death of a group of people you get banned. The UN however knows that "banning" someone with the authority to carry out their calls of violence doesn't prevent violence, it might actually encourage it.
localjargon t1_j0lzy2w wrote
I wish I had my free award right now for the Threads shout-out.
[deleted] t1_j0m4s8l wrote
[removed]
MrBurne t1_j0m5qok wrote
I chuckled!
LeicaM6guy t1_j0m6474 wrote
It’s funny, because intervention worked in Kosovo (sorta, more or less) but the UN signed off on it only after the fact.
Careless_Ad3968 t1_j0mhxid wrote
Everyone knows the UN is for show, no one takes them seriously.
carlitospig t1_j0mj4nr wrote
I feel like she should’ve understood this the first few years she was helping. The rest of us understood that the UN weren’t some benevolent angel organization.
rubywpnmaster t1_j0n43y1 wrote
I mean you make light of it but that’s basically how it works. The person with the most military and economic power basically has the ability to do just that.
Nekaz t1_j0na9a3 wrote
Ye i vaguely seem to recalll something about the league of nations basically dying cuz they tried to "actually" do certain things the un doesnt and countries like the US were like "nah fam im out". Idk its been too long since high school.
AdventurousAd8436 t1_j0ndl9e wrote
Except the U.N. is not an enforcement agency. The U.N. doesn't "allow" any one to do anything, since it has zero authority.
[deleted] t1_j0neg13 wrote
[removed]
BleachOrchid t1_j0qrwaa wrote
Other way around, League of Nations was a gentleman’s agreement with no teeth. It was replaced with the United Nations which has the ability to impose sanctions. More importantly League of Nations required a unanimous vote to pass a decision, UN does not.
Safe-Jackfruit-4902 t1_j0jk93y wrote
My house only has so many rooms, guys.