Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Nations Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Should the US withdraw from the UN
Y. pestis    2/9/2003 3:37:07 PM
As noted on another thread the UN is a treaty organization. It has no authority in and of itself to do anything. It has no fiat-no ability on its own to impliment any of its resolutions which is why they are just that-resolutions. With this in mind, should the US withdraw from the UN. The US has been one of the biggest funders of the UN. We have been the de facto military arm of the UN - when it needs to bring out the 'big guns'. Without the US the UN is religated to small 'peace keeping' operations. It did nothing to to stop the killings in Rowanda, let the food aid be seized in Somalia, allowed warlords to terrorize Somalia's people - now that the US has left Somalia is the basket case it was before (where is the UN?) at least the US tried - to our own detriment. What did the UN or the EU do to stop the serbs from killing muslims-not much. Now the world and the UN (or at least 3 members on the security council and countless member states) has turned its back on the Iraq issue, Iraq will be the next chair on the disarmament council, and Syria is in charge of human rights. Has the UN ceased to be revelent?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3   NEXT
Sikman    RE:Petition to Withdraw US from UN   2/3/2004 11:53:19 AM
The UN is too much of loudspeaker for third world despots. Why don't we create a new UN where only democratic nations qualify to join. If France has a problem with it, why dosen't the US decide to arbitrarily count the votes in the GA of countries that WE consider to be democratic enough and act according to their wishes. Unfortunately FRANCE is a democracy but you know sometimes you gotta take the good with the bad and all that.
 
Quote    Reply

sentinel28a    RE:Petition to Withdraw US from UN   2/3/2004 3:29:40 PM
There's the problem. Our definition of democracy is different from the socialist form of it in France, or the supposed form of it in the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea. *snort* Ah, for the days of Adlai Stevenson and Jeanne Kirkpatrick...
 
Quote    Reply

Sikman    RE:Petition to Withdraw US from UN   2/3/2004 8:00:47 PM
well the beauty of my proposal is that being the most powerful nation on earth, the US can use its standards to decide what constitutes a true democracy. I mean its better than just pulling out altogether.
 
Quote    Reply

Nanheyangrouchuan    RE:Petition to Withdraw US from UN   2/4/2004 8:31:26 AM
That's what we are doing already and look where it gets us. I say play on the current field to win, I don't think anyone will come to the US's UN under Sikman's terms. Besides, the US was the spearhead to create the orginal UN.
 
Quote    Reply

The Scales    Petition to Withdraw US from UN   2/8/2004 1:13:19 PM
You can talk or do something. Please support, sign, endorse and forward the petition at the following link to Withdraw the US from the UN link Thanks! The Scales link
 
Quote    Reply

appleciderus    The UN   2/8/2004 4:16:31 PM
Anyone who has read my posts cannot be confused or misunderstand my disdain for the UN. It is corrupt, bureaucratically bloated, self-serving, and often criminal in its behavior, or lack of action. It ignores areas that would truly improve the plight of mankind, and persistently attempts to gain control, increase political power, and protect criminal nation states. However, as foul as the UN is, I believe the US will, and should (reluctantly), remain a major presence in the UN. The danger to the US, and to the hopes of millions of people, is that the UN will grow in power. The danger lies with those who would surrender US sovereignty to the intellectual internationalist socialist elite who believe they are, and should be, the decision makers for the rest of the word. (while they enrich themselves) While we endure such outrageous situations as Syria serving as chair of the human rights commission, we need to be MORE vigilant towards those who propose that the human rights commission have subpoena or prosecutory powers. Let us not forget that the UN is a cesspool of bureaucratic corruption with a majority of self-serving despotic members. Let us not fail to remind the UN of this daily. Let us not succumb to the plaintiff cries of internationalists and socialists that the road to Nirvana runs through the UN. Let us vigilantly demand the UN spend more money on medicine than computers. IMO, the US can only do this as a member.
 
Quote    Reply

PuckaMan    RE:The UN   3/31/2004 7:58:05 PM
The UN is the highest embodiment of politics - screaming, bleating, sulking and compromise - al features of you local council. The UN is a forum, that has nominal goals and standards, and its subsidiary organisations do some good work - UNICEF for example. The USA is just as much responsible for the UN's problems as anyone else. That is to say, it was never intended to, or never will be perfect. And why should it be? Nothing human is perfect, least of all a international organisation thats purpose is to find common ground for nations or different races, religions, ethnicity, language, etc., etc. The UN was ideally set up to prevent anything getting to the point of WW2 again, along the way it was hijacked by the major powers as a Cold War battleground, and, since democracy cannot be simply 'imposed', It would be even worse it only democratic nations that the USA likes were allowed in. The UN has brokered peace and redevelopment to dozens of regions throughout the world - Cambodia, Africa, East Timor, Solomon Islands to name a few. It, of course, has had its failures. Just because the UN isn't going America's way, does not make it irrelevant and corrupt. If the USA pulled out of the UN, it would confirm for many the USA's percieved 'holier than thou' and 'my way or the highway' - stance, ie. a spoilt bully. The UN isn't perfect, and never will be. I agree that perhaps it need reform, but it does not have to go America's way. Pucka
 
Quote    Reply

NewGuy    RE:The UN...to 'PuckaMan'   4/1/2004 1:08:28 AM
"It would be even worse it only democratic nations that the USA likes were allowed in." How about if the UN did not include nations ruled by dictators, radical theocrats, or thugs, like North Korea, Libya, Syria, Iran, and two dozen or so other nations, NONE of which are democratic. Any problem with that? I agree that perhaps it need reform, but it does not have to go America's way. Reform? It needs a *major* restructuring and a hatchet job done on it: Ask the tiny nation of Israel what it thinks about the fairness and bias level of the UN -- do you know how many anti-Israeli resolutions are passed each year by the UN General Assembly? (answer:11 to 20) Do you know how many resolutions have been passed in the last 30+ years that condemned even one of the very real Arab/Pal terror acts against the state of Israel? (answer: 0) How can an organization that allows a significant minority of its membership to be taken up by non-democratic nations (many of whom are headed by ruthless exploiters of their own citizens) expect to create actions that are fair and democratic in nature? NewGuy
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:The UN   4/1/2004 8:58:40 PM
If it were only a debating society or, as the GA was originally described a "permanent diplomatic conference", it would be acceptable. The problem is that, over the years, it has begun to accumulate widespread international legitimacy as much more. It is far from, but moving towards, becoming an international government. At least, it is becoming the repository, in many minds, of the sole legitimatacy for the use of force. This is not acceptable. Virtually every critical comment I've ever read in this site about the UN is true, in some measure. But, you can't just walk away from the thing, because, in the present international context, doing so tends to isolate you in the world.
 
Quote    Reply

On Watch    Concur bsl, and as the 'ciderman said...   4/2/2004 5:58:17 AM
...as foul as the UN is, I believe the US will, and should (reluctantly), remain a major presence in the UN. The danger to the US, and to the hopes of millions of people, is that the UN will grow in power. The danger lies with those who would surrender US sovereignty to the intellectual internationalist socialist elite who believe they are, and should be, the decision makers for the rest of the word. (while they enrich themselves) While we endure such outrageous situations as Syria serving as chair of the human rights commission, we need to be MORE vigilant towards those who propose that the human rights commission have subpoena or prosecutory powers. Let us not forget that the UN is a cesspool of bureaucratic corruption with a majority of self-serving despotic member/s[states]. Let us not fail to remind the UN of this daily. Let us not succumb to the plaintiff cries of internationalists and socialists that the road to Nirvana runs through the UN. Speaking of 'Cider, hadn't heard his call letters for awhile...CQ CQ CQ
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy