• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

UN: Completely Worthless & Dysfunctional ????

Dragonfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
22,842
Reaction score
12,806
Location
East Coast - USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?

Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?

What am I missing?
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,014
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?

Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?

What am I missing?

Redundancy

BTW: I agree. No matter how many time this Admin refers to this body.
 

joG

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
43,839
Reaction score
9,637
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?

Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?

What am I missing?
I think you are absolutely right in that the UN is part of the problem. It prevents action, when action is needed. Syria and many other countries have demonstrated, what that means with Millions dead or in horrendous camps.

But that does not mean the fix would be to get rid of the organisation. We have to fix it. It needs the power to stop atrocities.

How do you persuade the members though? Many of them do not want the outside to have any influence on internal affairs. Many of the members governments are only in power because the population knows that the governments will crush any resistance. How do you want to persuade Putin?

Other countries like Germany or Switzerland do not want to pay the amounts that international security demands. Were they to stop free riding, large amounts of cash would have to be paid that are now used for other things
 

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?

Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?

What am I missing?
What you are missing is the most basic knowledge about how the U.N. works. Only the security council can authorize force and Russia will simply veto everything as Syria's ally. That isn't a flaw, that is how the system was designed. The U.S. does exactly the same thing whenever anyone messes with one of our allies.

I really don't understand why people engage in such childish whining about the U.N. It is toothless because everyone prefers is that way. If you give the U.N. the unilateral power to punish nations for war crimes, we'd have found ourselves on the chopping block for Iraq.
 

Dragonfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
22,842
Reaction score
12,806
Location
East Coast - USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
I really don't understand why people engage in such childish whining about the U.N. It is toothless because everyone prefers is that way.
Which means it's toothless, useless, redundant, and a gigantic waste of time and money.
 

Steelplate

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2013
Messages
364
Reaction score
149
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
What you are missing is the most basic knowledge about how the U.N. works. Only the security council can authorize force and Russia will simply veto everything as Syria's ally. That isn't a flaw, that is how the system was designed. The U.S. does exactly the same thing whenever anyone messes with one of our allies.

I really don't understand why people engage in such childish whining about the U.N. It is toothless because everyone prefers is that way. If you give the U.N. the unilateral power to punish nations for war crimes, we'd have found ourselves on the chopping block for Iraq.
And paves the way for a one world government that no one wants.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?

Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?

What am I missing?
The U.N. has always been an organization where the representatives of states that do not believe in democratic principles make a mockery of the notion by acting as if they are actually engaging in them.

It's a club without standards for admission, and a case of garbage in, garbage out.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,245
Reaction score
12,114
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What am I missing?
Pretty much everything it seems....

In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?
Nope, I would say the US congress is far more useless and inept than the UN.

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?
Easy, it says so in Article 1

Article 1

The Purposes of the United Nations are:

To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
Note the "international" part.. Syria is an internal issue.

Not to mention that any action has be sanctioned by the security council with no permanent members voting no. That is how it was set up back in the day... I dont like it, since I would want that 2/3s of all UN members should be able to override a veto by a permanent member.. but nope not at the moment.

To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
That is exactly what it has been doing for the last 50+ years.

To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
Again that is exactly what it has been doing for the last 50+ years through its under organisations.

To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
Again, this is what it has been doing. Not the UNs fault that the "attainment of these common ends" often cant happen because nations dont agree on the common ends part.

Plus the UN has no way to enforce any mandate it puts out.. cause that is how the organisation was made back in the day. The UN needs the military forces of its member nations to enforce anything.

So to your question... the UN is doing exactly what it was designed for. Sometimes it is very successful, other times it is not.. but in most cases the failures are not due to the UN but individual member nations.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,245
Reaction score
12,114
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The U.N. has always been an organization where the representatives of states that do not believe in democratic principles make a mockery of the notion by acting as if they are actually engaging in them.

It's a club without standards for admission, and a case of garbage in, garbage out.
If democratic principles was a requirement of membership, then the US would never have been allowed in.

Then again, it depends on the definition of course..

And if you only want an organisation where membership is based on democratic principles and human rights, then you would have a very small organisation.. it would basically be the EU, Canada, US, South Korea, Japan and Australia, who could not do anything but invade non democratic countries.. is that what you want?
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If democratic principles was a requirement of membership, then the US would never have been allowed in.

Then again, it depends on the definition of course..

And if you only want an organisation where membership is based on democratic principles and human rights, then you would have a very small organisation.. it would basically be the EU, Canada, US, South Korea, Japan and Australia, who could not do anything but invade non democratic countries.. is that what you want?
Pavlov called.

He needs his drool bucket back.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,926
Reaction score
37,998
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
[Snip...]

Nope, I would say the US congress is far more useless and inept than the UN.
They US has control over a military force to back up their wishes, the UN has hot air. ;)
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,102
Reaction score
12,353
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?
Yeah, because all those other international bodies like the Arab League, NATO, G20 etc are all doing such a bang-up job. The UN appears to be the only organisation that is actually doing anything to mediate, alleviate suffering of the displaced and apply pressure on the combatants. It's efforts achieve less than they could perhaps, because their work is constantly hampered by the supposedly big, important countries undermining confidence and reducing efficiency.

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?
The UN is providing the only leadership that seems to be around at the moment. Who else is?
Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?
Absolutely, I'll defend them. They do an amazing job under impossible circumstances made infinitely harder by the attacks of the so-called super-powers.

What am I missing?
Everything that the UN has been doing, obviously.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,889
Reaction score
33,985
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
it would basically be the EU, Canada, US, South Korea, Japan and Australia, who could not do anything but invade non democratic countries.. is that what you want?
I'd like to add a few countries to our team (Kenya, for example), and yes. Non democratic countries will come around pretty quick if we continue whupin' ass. No more of this 'having a genocidal dictator is good because it keeps the country stable' crap. The UN could have a motto: "Mr. Dictator, you might be next".
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,245
Reaction score
12,114
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I'd like to add a few countries to our team (Kenya, for example),

Kenya, you mean this Kenya with this leader?

ICC prosecutor says Kenyatta case will go to trial | Reuters

They elected a man charged with crimes against humanity... /clap.

and yes. Non democratic countries will come around pretty quick if we continue whupin' ass. No more of this 'having a genocidal dictator is good because it keeps the country stable' crap. The UN could have a motto: "Mr. Dictator, you might be next".
Oh they would? Lets see... Europe, Australia, US, Canada.. under 1 billion people... those on the other side... China, Russia, Indonesia, .. hell even India... 2+ billion easy... yea that is really a fight that "we" would win..
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,889
Reaction score
33,985
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Kenya, you mean this Kenya with this leader?

ICC prosecutor says Kenyatta case will go to trial | Reuters

They elected a man charged with crimes against humanity... /clap.
Best democracy in Africa.

Oh they would? Lets see... Europe, Australia, US, Canada.. under 1 billion people... those on the other side... China, Russia, Indonesia, .. hell even India... 2+ billion easy... yea that is really a fight that "we" would win..
I think India is with us, and even Russia. Besides, we wouldn't fight them all at the same time - that would be stupid. We'd piecemeal and surround them individually, like the Iranian regime. China can lumber along at its slow pace while we deal with the rest.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,245
Reaction score
12,114
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Best democracy in Africa.
Err okay, if you think "democracy" is a system where political parties/persons advocate the mass murder of opponents and actually carry them out in near genocide riots... sure great democracy.

2007

I think India is with us, and even Russia. Besides, we wouldn't fight them all at the same time - that would be stupid.
India, maybe.. but certain aspects of Indian society is not exactly democratic... and there are massive internal problems.

Russia.. HHAHA you have got to be kidding.. It is a dictatorship, and one of the worst ones out there.. arresting and jailing anyone who dares speak up against Putin... and that is the lucky ones... the unlucky ones get poisoned with uranium or shot in the streets...
 

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Which means it's toothless, useless, redundant, and a gigantic waste of time and money.
The U.N. is useless in the same way an adult who doesn't buy the spoiled kid the toy he wants is "useless". Right now the U.N. is serving a very important purpose with regards to Syria. It is sending the message of the collective nations of the world that they disagree with intervening in the conflict. That may bruise insecure ego's who can't handle anyone telling them no, but a real leader needs that information to make an informed decision. Maybe we listen to the U.N. or maybe we don't, but either we its damned important we figure out where everyone else stands before we take the plunge.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,889
Reaction score
33,985
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Err okay, if you think "democracy" is a system where political parties/persons advocate the mass murder of opponents and actually carry them out in near genocide riots... sure great democracy.

2007
I'm well aware of what happened in 2007. I was in Kenya in 2003 and 2005. And I was there after the violence for two years, 2010-12. It's still be most open and transparent democracy in Africa. It also has a (new) world-leading constitution. It was successful in running Al Shabaab from Somalia and has received extensive Western aid militarily and otherwise.

India, maybe.. but certain aspects of Indian society is not exactly democratic... and there are massive internal problems.
Certain aspects of every country are undemocratic. They're still on our side.

Russia.. HHAHA you have got to be kidding.. It is a dictatorship, and one of the worst ones out there.. arresting and jailing anyone who dares speak up against Putin... and that is the lucky ones... the unlucky ones get poisoned with uranium or shot in the streets...
And you think they're telling the truth about Syria?
 

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The U.N. has always been an organization where the representatives of states that do not believe in democratic principles make a mockery of the notion by acting as if they are actually engaging in them.

It's a club without standards for admission, and a case of garbage in, garbage out.
Dictators aren't going to go away simply because they aren't members of your club. They do in fact run much of the world and dealing with them is an unavoidable requirement of international relations. Its much more practical to let blowhard idiots pontificate in a forum than the more forceful alternatives.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,245
Reaction score
12,114
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I'm well aware of what happened in 2007. I was in Kenya in 2003 and 2005. And I was there after the violence for two years, 2010-12. It's still be most open and transparent democracy in Africa. It also has a (new) world-leading constitution. It was successful in running Al Shabaab from Somalia and has received extensive Western aid militarily and otherwise.
Seriously, you are defending a mass murderer.. and his government in a country known for rigged elections? I understand you like the country and its people, but that does not mean that their political system is a democracy or anywhere near it.

Certain aspects of every country are undemocratic. They're still on our side.
I think they would be neutral and only enter if China or Pakistan threatened their borders. India does not have a history of meddling in others affairs.

And you think they're telling the truth about Syria?
Yes and no. There is no doubt that they have a vested interest in propping up Assad and his government .. just as the US has a vested interested in getting Assad kicked out and hence also the Russians. That is why one has to question motivations of all sides in the conflict and the gas attack.

Assad would be utterly stupid to bite the hand that protects him.. by using gas that would force the Russians to choose sides, and bring down the wrath of the west.

On the other hand, if the rebels (or one of the many groups) could provoke the reaction of the west and make Russia dump Assad, then they could turn imminent defeat into victory and start the second civil war faster (yes that will come after Assad is gone).

So I am with the Russians on wanting to see any and ALL evidence before making a judgement. So far we have seen some of the evidence and it has not been overwhelming to say the least... dejavu feelings with the lead up to the Iraq war. The US says it was rockets, but no evidence to prove it was other than the US saying it was. The US says it has intercepts but do not provide them.. things like this makes me very suspicious.. when someone says there is a smoking gun but refuses to present it.

And then there is the fact that the rebels have been caught, both in Syria and outside of Syria with chemical weapons material, so saying that it is only then Assad government that has gas... is bull****. Anyone with a bit of knowledge and materials can make this gas supposedly used. It is the same gas as used in Japan by that nutso religious nut a few decades ago.

For all I know it could be some of Assads people who did it, without Assads knowledge.. just as it could be a faction within the rebels.. .. but one thing is sure... it should be those who carried out the attack who should be punished not someone who is innocent of the crime.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
117,889
Reaction score
33,985
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Seriously, you are defending a mass murderer.. and his government in a country known for rigged elections? I understand you like the country and its people, but that does not mean that their political system is a democracy or anywhere near it.
What democracy would you say compares in Africa. Let's leave the South Africa argument aside for the moment, do you have another nomination (Ghana?).

I think they would be neutral and only enter if China or Pakistan threatened their borders. India does not have a history of meddling in others affairs.
I'm pretty sure India divided a country and created a water theme park to their east.

Yes and no. There is no doubt that they have a vested interest in propping up Assad and his government .. just as the US has a vested interested in getting Assad kicked out and hence also the Russians. That is why one has to question motivations of all sides in the conflict and the gas attack.
All else being equal, do you find the US to be more or less credible than: "dictatorship, and one of the worst ones out there.. arresting and jailing anyone who dares speak up against Putin... and that is the lucky ones... the unlucky ones get poisoned with uranium or shot in the streets...".

And then there is the fact that the rebels have been caught, both in Syria and outside of Syria with chemical weapons material, so saying that it is only then Assad government that has gas... is bull****. Anyone with a bit of knowledge and materials can make this gas supposedly used. It is the same gas as used in Japan by that nutso religious nut a few decades ago.
There is no evidence of rebels using chems.

For all I know it could be some of Assads people who did it, without Assads knowledge.. just as it could be a faction within the rebels.. .. but one thing is sure... it should be those who carried out the attack who should be punished not someone who is innocent of the crime.
A dictator slaughtering tens of thousands of his own people and losing control of his military (and/or stockpile) to the point of WMDs being employed is a dictator that needs to go.
 
Last edited:

Wiggen

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
15,326
Reaction score
5,968
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
In light of the Syrian events, can we now assume the UN is without question the most useless and inept organization on the planet?

What is the purpose of the UN if not to take the lead in something as pressing as what's going on in Syria?

Will anyone defend the UN at this time as being something of value to the world?

What am I missing?
Hardly anybody takes the UN seriously any more. They are a useless organization, at least as far as dealing with military issues is concerned. They do provide a handy forum for bashing the US and especially Israel - something generally done by countries that most of us wouldn't visit at gunpoint.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,245
Reaction score
12,114
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The UN is also not a government and as such as no jurisdiction over any territory or people.
And it never says that it has.... only American right wing wackos say that and believe that..
 
Top Bottom