Worthless UN???

[NolaMan]

Amusing.
US funds money into it not to mention makes up most of the initiative that come from decisions.

Agreed US funds 22% of the UN budget. If that went away, it would hurt them.

US and UK Armies always make up any peace force sent by the UN.

This is actually not true. You can get the breakdown of troop contributions by country from the UN site. You will notice that the UK and the US rank very lowly, UK being in the low 40's and the US being around 75.

Without US, UN would become a joke. It needs world powers

It does need world powers, but not for the reasons you indicate.

 

[German guy]

It's true, the UN has many shortcomings, and it's certainly not anymore suited as a source of moral authority than certain national governments, as some like to believe.

The major flaw, of course, is the contradiction between the international law principle of equality of all member states, versus the obvious differences regarding respect for human rights and democratic standards between the member states. International law enforcement may prevent war between states, but it's not suited to keep dirty dictators from massacres against his own population or minorities, or general oppression -- according to international law, that would be "internal affairs". According to international law, countries like North Korea and Sweden are legally equal.

Another major flaw is political abuse of the UN by certain member states, especially the Security Council members, for their own interests. During the Cold War, both USA and USSR blocked various decidions for partisan reasons within the bloc confrontation. Today, that still sometimes happens when either US, Chinese or Russian interests are concerned. The permanent members of the SC hardly give a fair representation of worldwide influence and importance of member states.

But despite all these flaws, I think the UN is a necessary institution that has done by far more good than bad on this planet. It's the only institution that is considered a more or less fair, impartial and neutral force in many cases suited to deescalate regional conflicts and surveil the enforcement of peace contracts. And indeed, the UN has indeed managed to deescalate many crisis situations, prevented various conflicts and supported reconstruction and deescalation after regional conflicts have been ended. There is no other institution that could play this role, certainly not the US.

The UN are certainly flawed and it's hardly the answer to war and oppression on this planet, but it's definitely a useful and necessary tool for conflict prevention and peace enforcement.

 

[NolaMan]

It's true, the UN has many shortcomings, and it's certainly not anymore suited as a source of moral authority than certain national governments, as some like to believe.

The major flaw, of course, is the contradiction between the international law principle of equality of all member states, versus the obvious differences regarding respect for human rights and democratic standards between the member states. International law enforcement may prevent war between states, but it's not suited to keep dirty dictators from massacres against his own population or minorities, or general oppression -- according to international law, that would be "internal affairs". According to international law, countries like North Korea and Sweden are legally equal.

Another major flaw is political abuse of the UN by certain member states, especially the Security Council members, for their own interests. During the Cold War, both USA and USSR blocked various decidions for partisan reasons within the bloc confrontation. Today, that still sometimes happens when either US, Chinese or Russian interests are concerned. The permanent members of the SC hardly give a fair representation of worldwide influence and importance of member states.

But despite all these flaws, I think the UN is a necessary institution that has done by far more good than bad on this planet. It's the only institution that is considered a more or less fair, impartial and neutral force in many cases suited to deescalate regional conflicts and surveil the enforcement of peace contracts. And indeed, the UN has indeed managed to deescalate many crisis situations, prevented various conflicts and supported reconstruction and deescalation after regional conflicts have been ended. There is no other institution that could play this role, certainly not the US.

The UN are certainly flawed and it's hardly the answer to war and oppression on this planet, but it's definitely a useful and necessary tool for conflict prevention and peace enforcement.

I am curious to hear your views on a possible permanent German seat on the UNSC should reform or expansion occur.

 

[German guy]

I am curious to hear your views on a possible permanent German seat on the UNSC should reform or expansion occur.

I'm not sure we need another European power in a reformed council. Also, I am in favor of a united EU defense policy, so I think if at all, the British and French seats should be replaced by a common EU seat. What's more important, though, is that in a reformed UNSC, new emerging powers and previously unrepresented regions find representation: What about regional powers like Brazil, India, South Africa, for example? To give them and their regions a better representation would make more sense than adding another European power.

 

[NolaMan]

I'm not sure we need another European power in a reformed council. Also, I am in favor of a united EU defense policy, so I think if at all, the British and French seats should be replaced by a common EU seat. What's more important, though, is that in a reformed UNSC, new emerging powers and previously unrepresented regions find representation: What about regional powers like Brazil, India, South Africa, for example? To give them and their regions a better representation would make more sense than adding another European power.

Do you envision a role for NATO in a united EU defense policy?

I would agree that I would oppose a German seat on the UNSC, unless France of the UK wanted to resign, which is about 99.999% unlikely. I would also add Japan to your list of potential nations that might be included in an expansion.

Ultimately, I would probably oppose any real expansion, but the argument does have some merits.

 

[RightinNYC]

They keep on talking of adding permanent seats for Brazil and India, but even if they go that far, I would be astonished if they came with veto power. Increasing the number of members with vetos can only serve as an impediment to SC action. By the same token, there's no chance we'll ever see reform that would eliminate or substantially limit veto power for the countries that already have it.

 

[joe246]

what the un needs to do is create stability through economic programs creating infrastructure and developing free market economy's and constitutional republics. it should turn its peacekeeping force into highly trained special forces and topple dictatorships through assassination. un should recieve funding from massive corporations who have plenty and in return help put a starbucks and a mcdonalds in every third world country

 

[German guy]

Do you envision a role for NATO in a united EU defense policy?

If the EU manages to get its act together, and finds a truly united defense policy (and maybe a united army, even), then I think this doesn't mean the end of NATO. On the contrary, I would appreciate it if this alliance went on. Currently, Europe is a freerider on American security, and I think it's only fair when we take more responsibility and take some of the burden from the US. We should be able to defend ourselves even without US support. But this expansion of EU military power is not supposed to be directed against the US. Ideally, we'd still be close partners on the field of security, just on a more equal level.

I'm not sure, though, if the EU manages to do that. There is still a lot of national egoism determining the policies of member states, in the way of what's good for the whole of Europe. On the other side, it has always been like that, and the history of European integration has always been a history of "two steps forward, one step backwards" -- and despite this, we've come so far, even have a common currency and economic zone (which I am confident will survive even the recent economic trouble). When that was possible, I believe some day, even a united security policy is possible. May still take a few decades, though.

 

[Patria Antiqua]

Good at eradicating diseases, bad at everything else. It's time to disband the UN, as it's now good only for corrupt aid programs and spreading anti-Semitism.

 

[ricksfolly]

Good at eradicating diseases, bad at everything else. It's time to disband the UN, as it's now good only for corrupt aid programs and spreading anti-Semitism.

If the UN needs fixing, it's a USA problem. It's located in the US, New York, and we run it.

ricksfolly

 

[Patria Antiqua]

If the UN needs fixing, it's a USA problem. It's located in the US, New York, and we run it.

ricksfolly

NATO is centered in Brussels, does that mean everything NATO does is Belgium's responsibility? Of course not, stop being silly.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

If the UN needs fixing, it's a USA problem. It's located in the US, New York, and we run it.

ricksfolly

Awesome :thumbs:



I got the fix. An eviction notice.

 

[OscarB63]

Awesome :thumbs:



I got the fix. An eviction notice.

right on. I have been saying for years that the US needs to stop wasting time and money on the UN. It's like a horrible investment and we just keep on throwing more and more money at it year after year with no results.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

right on. I have been saying for years that the US needs to stop wasting time and money on the UN. It's like a horrible investment and we just keep on throwing more and more money at it year after year with no results.

Its a criminal enterprise that turns a blind eye on its peacekeepers setting up underage brothels in places its supposed to help. Sudan, and as i've seen 1st hand in the balkans.


Thats just the tip of the icberg for me.

 

[ricksfolly]

Awesome :thumbs:

I got the fix. An eviction notice.

Of course hawks didn't like it when the UN voted the Iraq war as being illegal, and abortion is still a sticking point, but that's all in the past, and shouldn't effect the good things they do.

The truth is we still need it, warts and all, because it's the only world wide organization. Fixing it is a far better option than starting a new and different world organization. Cheaper, too, because if they go out of business we will be forced to pay the long standing debt we owe them.

ricksfolly

 

[OscarB63]

Cheaper, too, because if they go out of business we will be forced to pay the long standing debt we owe them.

ricksfolly

and what debt would that be? the US already shoulders the lion's share of the support for the UN. "we" don't need the UN. You could probably list on one hand the "good" things the UN has done. Off the top of my head...I can't think of a single one.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Of course hawks didn't like it when the UN voted the Iraq war as being illegal, and abortion is still a sticking point, but that's all in the past, and shouldn't effect the good things they do.

The truth is we still need it, warts and all, because it's the only world wide organization. Fixing it is a far better option than starting a new and different world organization. Cheaper, too, because if they go out of business we will be forced to pay the long standing debt we owe them.

ricksfolly

Debt we owe them? If we stopped dumping money into that international house of dictators it would cease to exist.



Under what fantasy do you think we owe those ****birds any money?


And how the **** do you think they cojld ever collect it? :lamo

 

[Gardener]

You could probably list on one hand the "good" things the UN has done.

an entire hand?

heck, just one finger is about all it takes to salute this organization properly.

 

[William Rea]

The UN is as effective as its member states allow it to be.

 

[tlmorg02]

The UN is limited and has low effectiveness because it relies on all those involved to cooperate. I see no reason to get rid of the organization. It cultivates dialogue in the international community and provides opportunity to work together in providing aid and some oversight. As we saw during the run-up to the Iraq War, if the UN had more power, it would have pitted the US in a battle with the international body. Some may view that as a good thing, but remaining mostly concerned with sanctions is where the UN needs to stay.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

The UN is limited and has low effectiveness because it relies on all those involved to cooperate. I see no reason to get rid of the organization. It cultivates dialogue in the international community and provides opportunity to work together in providing aid and some oversight. As we saw during the run-up to the Iraq War, if the UN had more power, it would have pitted the US in a battle with the international body. Some may view that as a good thing, but remaining mostly concerned with sanctions is where the UN needs to stay.

bull****, when we do that, they steal and embezzle.

The Iraq Oil-for-food Scandal

It is a criminal enterprise and should be shut down.

 

[tlmorg02]

bull****, when we do that, they steal and embezzle.

The Iraq Oil-for-food Scandal

It is a criminal enterprise and should be shut down.

Of course that was a scandal, and please do not think the US was an angel in that whole thing either. Regardless, whereever there are a large number of groups, each with their own agenda, there will be corruption. The question is whether having a platform for discussion is important enough to preserve the system.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Of course that was a scandal, and please do not think the US was an angel in that whole thing either. Regardless, whereever there are a large number of groups, each with their own agenda, there will be corruption. The question is whether having a platform for discussion is important enough to preserve the system.

The US Government was made the scapegoat. What are you talking about? They made millions off of the sanctions while blaming the US for Iraqi deaths. Please


Let's not forget thier blind eye to thier peacekeepers setting up child brothels for its memebers...



I'd be happy to put a bullet inthe head of a UN jack booted thug given the chance.

 

[tlmorg02]

The US Government was made the scapegoat. What are you talking about? They made millions off of the sanctions while blaming the US for Iraqi deaths. Please


Let's not forget thier blind eye to thier peacekeepers setting up child brothels for its memebers...



I'd be happy to put a bullet inthe head of a UN jack booted thug given the chance.

Our insistence on banning medical supplies and other necessities provided the basis for the black market and corruption to enter. Had we simply monitored and allowed the water systems to be repaired and medications to enter the country, rather than always saying no, then much of the corruption would not have developed. Just like in this country with drugs. We create other crimes just by keeping them illegal.

Regardless, there were indeed many bad guys in the operation and the whole international community had a hand in it. My point is that such instances should be learned from and those guilty punished, but better cooperation must be exercised to get to that point.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Our insistence on banning medical supplies and other necessities provided the basis for the black market and corruption to enter. Had we simply monitored and allowed the water systems to be repaired and medications to enter the country, rather than always saying no, then much of the corruption would not have developed. Just like in this country with drugs. We create other crimes just by keeping them illegal.

Regardless, there were indeed many bad guys in the operation and the whole international community had a hand in it. My point is that such instances should be learned from and those guilty punished, but better cooperation must be exercised to get to that point.

We did? Link please. Your parroting the UN blame game line.