• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.N. to Seek Control of the Internet

Because the US currently is able to shut down access to a German website being accessed by a German citizen located in Germany when said German citizen is breaking no German law.

This annoys other countries. Many of those countries are our allies and trading partners.

Additionally, the international nature of the internet means that businesses are currently forced to abide by hundreds of differing sets of regulations. Business would benefit from having a more unified regulatory environment.

One of the major concerns of major players is US control of ICANN. At present, in the event of hostilities, The US could simply reallocate a country's IP addresses, rendering their online resources useless at a stroke. A relocation of such a sensitive global resource to a neutral country such as Switzerland is probably inevitable, though it might take a decade of kicking and screaming.

BBC News - US resists control of internet passing to UN agency
 
The UN does not want to take control of the Internet... most countries want the US to loose control because of its abuse of the system time and time again. The obvious place to put such control is the UN, most likely in an organisation under the UN... like UNESCO and WHO and WTO.

How does one "abuse" the internet? I don't believe the internet is something that can be abused.

Also, the UN believes they have the authority to control everything. If it was up to the UN we would have a one world government with a single Marxist "dear leader."

The UN is about as evil of an entity one could think up in an alleged "free world."
 
From the OP....




So, while you think this is all ado about not much, have you read this part? and why would you ignore such a possibility? Clearly you like the internet, and use it....But is it just the ideological mind that is blinded equally where you claim we see UN=bad, you in turn see UN=all good.....So just what the hell are you arguing here?

That conservatives in this thread are complaining about proposals they have no details about.

You can try and pretend like I'm doing the same if it makes you feel better. Feel free to quote where I've done that.
 
How does one "abuse" the internet? I don't believe the internet is something that can be abused.

Also, the UN believes they have the authority to control everything. If it was up to the UN we would have a one world government with a single Marxist "dear leader."

The UN is about as evil of an entity one could think up in an alleged "free world."

Shutting off access to a German website from a German citizen who lives in Germany who is breaking no German laws would be considered abuse by any reasonable standard.

Your perception of the UN's goals is outright ridiculous. Or are you suggesting that China, Russia, Iran, and France are all trying to submit themselves to the same singular leadership? :lamo
 
I don't see any reason to internationalize the internet beyond what already exists. The UN as a collaborative and consensus body on an equal basis is not I think the proper or desirable body for the internet. The United States and our network of NGO's and quasi-parastatal organizations have done an excellent job so far, let's not shift gears.
 
How does one "abuse" the internet? I don't believe the internet is something that can be abused.

Easy. When a single country can seize a .Com domain because that webpage breaks the law in the US then you have abuse. That the page is for people in another country where the content is legal seems to be irrelevant for the US. That is abuse.

Also, the UN believes they have the authority to control everything.

Er no, American right wing fanatics believe this... it is far far from reality.

If it was up to the UN we would have a one world government with a single Marxist "dear leader."

Wait the black helicopters will come and take you, get your tinfoil hat on so they cant track you!

The UN is about as evil of an entity one could think up in an alleged "free world."

Yea they are so evil those organisations like WHO, WTO, UNESCO, UNICEF and so on... helping people those evil entities....
 
Easy. When a single country can seize a .Com domain because that webpage breaks the law in the US then you have abuse. That the page is for people in another country where the content is legal seems to be irrelevant for the US. That is abuse.



Er no, American right wing fanatics believe this... it is far far from reality.



Wait the black helicopters will come and take you, get your tinfoil hat on so they cant track you!



Yea they are so evil those organisations like WHO, WTO, UNESCO, UNICEF and so on... helping people those evil entities....

Do you realize how insanely absurd your argument is?

People who buy dominion names abuse the internet?

So basically what you're saying is that I shouldn't have the right to buy a dominion name as a private citizen of the US, not only that but you're arguing this point on a .com which was purchased by a private citizen (er abuser of the internet)... Oh and to make your argument even more absurd you have 15,541 posts and have been a member since 2006 on a private .com site.

If you feel the way you do then why are you posting here?

Right now you're like Che "Ernesto" Guevara "Lynch" shopping at Walmart with every post you make on www.debatepolitics.COM
 
Shutting off access to a German website from a German citizen who lives in Germany who is breaking no German laws would be considered abuse by any reasonable standard.

Your perception of the UN's goals is outright ridiculous. Or are you suggesting that China, Russia, Iran, and France are all trying to submit themselves to the same singular leadership? :lamo

No websites should be shutdown. The Germans have never changed - they're still fascists, just in a different sense.

China, Russia and Iran highly censor their "internet." They're on totally different servers. The average internet user in the US doesn't have access to their servers. At one point there was an access point via google but that no longer exists, however it is against the law in China, Russia, Iran etc for their citizens to tap into our servers and be exposed to what we're exposed to everyday online.
 
Do you realize how insanely absurd your argument is?

Oh it is?

People who buy dominion names abuse the internet?

That is not what I said. And it also clearly shows you dont know how domain names are given out and how big an influence the US has.

So basically what you're saying is that I shouldn't have the right to buy a dominion name as a private citizen of the US, not only that but you're arguing this point on a .com which was purchased by a private citizen (er abuser of the internet)... Oh and to make your argument even more absurd you have 15,541 posts and have been a member since 2006 on a private .com site.

No that is not what I am saying, that is what you are saying.

I am saying, that lets say a British company buys a .com domain and starts to do its business in the UK and that business is fully legal there. However in the US it is not, and hence the feds can (and have) seized said domain because the content breaks US law... but as I said not UK law, which is the intended target.

Right now you're like Che "Ernesto" Guevara "Lynch" shopping at Walmart with every post you make on www.debatepolitics.COM

And you are just ignoring what I am writing and making stuff up.
 
Oh it is?



That is not what I said. And it also clearly shows you dont know how domain names are given out and how big an influence the US has.



No that is not what I am saying, that is what you are saying.

I am saying, that lets say a British company buys a .com domain and starts to do its business in the UK and that business is fully legal there. However in the US it is not, and hence the feds can (and have) seized said domain because the content breaks US law... but as I said not UK law, which is the intended target.



And you are just ignoring what I am writing and making stuff up.

Can you cite an example?

Honestly, I'm a huge hockey nut, but I don't subscribe to cable so I watch games online on a (free) site where individuals upload games in real time via capture card and the government shut that site down. However, that same site moved their servers to Switzerland now the US government cant do anything about it.

Is that a good example of what you're talking about?
 
No websites should be shutdown. The Germans have never changed - they're still fascists, just in a different sense.

China, Russia and Iran highly censor their "internet." They're on totally different servers. The average internet user in the US doesn't have access to their servers. At one point there was an access point via google but that no longer exists, however it is against the law in China, Russia, Iran etc for their citizens to tap into our servers and be exposed to what we're exposed to everyday online.
I can't speak for China and Iran but as far as Russia goes, this statement is simply not true. I have spent a lot of time in St. Petersburg over the past three years and I can tell you first hand that access is not limited. I never had any difficulty viewing any news site, facebook, message board, e-mail, etc... In fact, I actually thought things were "loser" there than they are here. I could actually watch live NFL games for FREE!

Pretty cool, if you ask me.
 
I can't speak for China and Iran but as far as Russia goes, this statement is simply not true. I have spent a lot of time in St. Petersburg over the past three years and I can tell you first hand that access is not limited. I never had any difficulty viewing any news site, facebook, message board, e-mail, etc... In fact, I actually thought things were "loser" there than they are here. I could actually watch live NFL games for FREE!

Pretty cool, if you ask me.

I agree about Russia... Russia is certainly becoming a capitalist and liberal nation, however the nation is still authoritarian or strict.

I find the Russian transition extremely interesting.

Yes in Russia you're allowed outside access to the internet but it is not promoted... I suppose the best way to explain what I'm trying to say is that Russians keep to themselves....

On the weird flip side of the coin the Chinese absolutely love the Russians. I was able to get into a Chinese message board one time and it was completely bizarre. Absolutely everyone was in agreement. They didn't say much of anything... I cracked the server when Russia invaded Georgia back in 2007 and all they said was "congratulations comrades" - they had emotions about that but in other topics they would post odd things like "today I ate rice - rice is good" yeah, that is pretty much the typical post on a Chinese board.

The Chinese also have "internet police" if you say the wrong thing they post this picture.

PCP284.feat3.bodyimage1-420-90.jpg


That would be comparable to a mod warning here on any message board.. The only difference is that instead of being banned you can be arrested for speaking your opinions on issues.
 
Last edited:
Maybe he meant North Korea.

They really don't have internet in North Korea... The elitists do but other than that - no go.

I wouldn't call what North Korea has as "internet" it is more like a segregated network.

I want to get into their servers....
 
They really don't have internet in North Korea... The elitists do but other than that - no go.

I wouldn't call what North Korea has as "internet" it is more like a segregated network.

I want to get into their servers....

Agreed to who has the internet, but I am sure what little bit they do have, is heavily monitored.
 
When people denounce the UN as a collection of tinhorn, crackpot, and socialist dictators that violate America's sovereignty they forget that the US is the most powerful member of the UN, and we gain far more influence from being part of the UN than the UN influences us. The ITU doesn't want to regulate the Internet, and the US or Europe, both of whom are very much opposed to the UN running things, could easily block any takeover if that's what the ITU wanted.
 
Back
Top Bottom