conserv.pat15
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Messages
- 647
- Reaction score
- 7
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Should the U.S. get out of the U.N.?
talloulou said:What would be the benefit of getting out of the U.N.?
Well considering that we are one of the most powerful nations I don't consider that too much.conserv.pat15 said:I think that the U.S. spends too much money on the U.N. and we are not getting our moneys worth. We pay over 20% of the money that goes to the U.N.(I'm not sure of the exact percentage, it might be more).
Yes they definitely showed their weakness in that situation, I agree. But we also showed them we don't abide by the UN when it comes to decision making. Since we don't view the UN as an authority that most be obeyed....what's the problem? At least remaining a UN member shows that we are open to cooperating with other nations, doesn't it?Not to mention the whole Iraq situation and how they did not enforce their own rules/resolutions.
alphamale said:The original "united nations" were the democracies (and the soviet union) that defeated the fascists in WWII. After that, it was expanded to include all kinds of dictatorships and theocracies. It's "Human Rights Commission" members has included such as Cuba, China, and Zimbabwe. It's farcical head, Kofi Annan, walks around like some kind of potentate with an entourage, seemingly oblivious to the corruption that has occurred on his watch. It serves as a forum for the representatives of dictators of toilet bowl countries to attack the U.S., all of whom would be now working in nazi slave camps except for the U.S. It did nothing to solve the cold war, is doing nothing to solve the islamofascist war. The U.S. needs to get out of this ridiculous organization, and form a new United Democratic Nations, to which only democratic nations are admitted.
Here was my response...Tashah said:Established in 1945, the United Nations is the stepchild of the failed League of Nations. Initially, the United Nations only accepted membership from the Allied Alliance nations who had declared war on the Axis Powers. This caveat meant that the original UN members shared a basic common cause and moral clarity. UN membership was eventually opened to all nations of the international community... regardless of political or moral stance.
In its current formulation, the United Nations majority is composed of Third World nations ruled by dictators and authoritarian regimes. This majority has formed a resolution/voting bloc which has resulted in the organizational marginalization of democratic nations.
Although the United Nations boasts of an international legitimacy and claims a moral high ground, it is now viewed by many democratic nations as an irrelevant tower of Babel that has substituted moral equivalence for moral clarity. The track record of the UN in addressing moral crisis is on the whole quite appalling... Israel/Palestine, the Uganda of Idi Amin, Cambodia, Eritrea, Bosnia/Kosovo, Rwanda, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Iraq, and now Sudan. It is failing in efforts to address the critical issue of nuclear prolifferation with India, Pakistan, Libya, North Korea, and Iran as prominent examples. Criminal activity such as child prostitution by UN troops in areas under its juristiction has been reported, and organizational corruption such as the Iraq Oil For Food Program is being investigated. Authoritative and despotic regimes such as Syria and Sudan have been promoted to the UN Security Council and the UN Commission on Human Rights.
Has the time now come for the democracies of the world to disengage from the United Nations and form a new international agency such as the Community of Democracies?
cnredd said:Although I believe the UN should be disbanded, how about this for a compromise...Every two years, the UN delegates have a vote on where the most pressing need is in the world(currently, I'd go with Sudan)...
Here comes the fun part...The UN packs up, gathers the airline tickets...and GOES there!
No more mid-afternoon tea breaks and immunity status...Watch the genocide firsthand from the shack-view...
Maybe that will get them to do a little problem-solving...
Although the United Nations boasts of an international legitimacy and claims a moral high ground, it is now viewed by many democratic nations as an irrelevant tower of Babel that has substituted moral equivalence for moral clarity. The track record of the UN in addressing moral crisis is on the whole quite appalling... Israel/Palestine, the Uganda of Idi Amin, Cambodia, Eritrea, Bosnia/Kosovo, Rwanda, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Iraq, and now Sudan. It is failing in efforts to address the critical issue of nuclear prolifferation with India, Pakistan, Libya, North Korea, and Iran as prominent examples. Criminal activity such as child prostitution by UN troops in areas under its juristiction has been reported, and organizational corruption such as the Iraq Oil For Food Program is being investigated. Authoritative and despotic regimes such as Syria and Sudan have been promoted to the UN Security Council and the UN Commission on Human Rights.
Willoughby said:i see things like this and i just think that rather than disband or pull out of the UN it should be strengthened and given more power
GarzaUK said:The purpose of the UN was stop another world war happening after the devestation of WW2. In that respects it has been sucessful.
The UN was vital during the Cold War as a mediator between the two superpowers.
Also it was the UN that is helping the reconstruction effort in Iraq and is also responsible for providing elecions there. So America even now still uses the UN.
I'm voting not sure, because I couldn't give a **** what America does anymore.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?