On 7/3/03 10:02, in article be1d18$6ct3$1@ID-105084.news.dfncis.de, "Kevin
Gowen" <kgowenNOSPAM@myfastmail.com> wrote:

 
>>>>>> http://washingtontimes.com/world/20030701-115649-1264r.htm
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Many of those most opposed to the U.S.-led effort in Iraq now
>>>>>> argue that
>>>>>> American participation is vital to the success of a proposed
>>>>>> 5,000-strong
>>>>>> multinational peacekeeping mission to enforce a cease-fire. Among
>>>>>> them are
>>>>>> U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, leading European powers ?
>>>>>> including
>>>>>> France ? and the editorial page of the New York Times."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Why does a country with 6% of the world's population pay 22% of the
>>>>> UN's expenses?
>>>> 
>>>> Because said country agreed to do so.
>>> 
>>> Therefore, if the county currently paying 22% of the UN's expenses
>>> decides that enough is enough, and their share should be lower (say
>>> 6%), that would be perfectably acceptable?
>> 
>> Please refer to Kevin's correction to my post.
>> 
>> I would favor Sepponia pulling out of the UN and kicking the
>> organization out of the country, except for one little thing.
> 
> I have good news for you about that one little thing. But first, I have to
> address Jason's statement.
> 
> I suppose that Jason's statement is true

Yes.