US Ambassador to the UN: “For those who don’t have our backs, we’re taking names”

The new US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, brought a rather different tone to her first press conference after a meeting of the Security Council.

This is refreshing.

Haley told reporters, “Our goal with the administration is to show value at the UN, and the way to show value is to show our strength, show our full voice. Have the backs of our allies and make sure our allies have our backs as well.”

She added, “For those who don’t have our backs, we’re taking names, and we will make points to respond to that accordingly.”


 

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in ¡Hagan lío!, Just Too Cool, The future and our choices and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to US Ambassador to the UN: “For those who don’t have our backs, we’re taking names”

  1. Legisperitus says:

    It would be nice if some administration would acknowledge the fact that there are Palestinian Christians. That doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon.

  2. Chris Rawlings says:

    I live in Israel. I’m a Catholic. Your cheerleading here is, frankly, ridiculous and wrong.

  3. Kathleen10 says:

    Sheesh, what cheerleading Chris. This is such a departure from the last administration, so it’s news. Every day we should be grateful for the 180 degree change in tone on so many topics, this one included. Are we or are we not for Israel.

  4. LovedSinner says:

    I like Nikki Haley. I think she’ll be great.

    But our last UN Ambassador, Samantha Power, was great too. Samantha Power wrote a book, A Problem From Hell, about the failure of the Western democracies in the past hundred years to stop genocide, and how exactly such a huge moral failure could have repeatedly happened. Sadly, Obama did not always listen to her advice, especially in Syria.

    I hope Trump remembers that over 100,000 civilians have died in Syria in the past six years and stands up to Putin when Russia uses bunker busting bombs on civilians and so on. We shall see.

  5. CrimsonCatholic says:

    LovedSinner,

    Samantha Power was not a good Ambassador because she pushed for LGBT “rights” on countries and that she refused to say the Armenian genocide was a genocide. I don’t see why you praise her for writing a book on something on stopping genocide when she can’t even say the word genocide.

  6. LeeF says:

    The whole premise of the UN general assembly, that every speck of an island “nation” with a population less than an American small town is entitled to an equal vote to ours, is ridiculous.

    @LovedSinner,

    We are not and cannot afford to be the world’s policeman. All those Islamic sects left to themselves would just continue to kill each other, and it is not our duty to stop them at whatever the cost. Being able to reverse the invasion of Kuwait and be done with it is one thing, but trying to constantly be in the middle of various Islamic civil wars is quite a another. With the twisted ideology of the Koran there will never be an end to it, and we should not waste more lives of our soldiers trying to prove otherwise.

  7. LovedSinner says:

    @ LeeF

    Respectfully, you are making a straw man argument. I never said we should be the world’s policeman, nor did I say that we should stop them whatever the cost. Actually, I believe that the doctrine of Double Effect is what we should be using, and this does indeed include the costs in the decision.

    Syria is not an easy solution and there are no easy answers. All I was stating is that Muslims are still made in the image and likeness of God. Whatever solutions could reduce the killing of innocents there should be considered. Whatever other countries like Russia do to kill innocents should also be responded to in some way. Where possible, we should try to be Good Samaritans to those in danger of death. Do you still disagree with this?

  8. Legisperitus says:

    I tend to agree with the recent Latin Patriarchs of Jerusalem, who believe protection of Palestinian Christians should be the primary value in Middle East policy.

    Many Republicans who are Evangelicals seem to take a sycophantic attitude toward Israel because they are invested in “Christian Zionism,” the belief that the triumph of a Jewish state in the Holy Land will bring about the Second Coming. Christian Zionism was condemned by Latin Patriarch Michel Sabbah and others in the 2006 Jerusalem Declaration as inconsistent with Christian teaching.

    I’m not sure where Nikki Haley is personally coming from on this. She supposedly identifies as both a Methodist and a Sikh. Perhaps she is merely devoted to the advance of “democracy” over Islamic types of governments, but I don’t consider any view of the Middle East that ignores the plight of Christians as a particularly enlightened one.

  9. SKAY says:

    I thought Ambassador Haley was reassuring our allies that they can count on us to
    actually BE their allies. What a concept!!

    It is refreshing, Father.