View Full Version : United Nations

10-21-2002, 09:21 PM
We now live in 21st century with so high civilization and modernize that make the world become small like a house of all human being. And the world established UN and count on it to stablize the world. We contribute money to UN for its survival, but
I feel UN is kinda powerless and useless. Every day many innocent people were killed by barbaric and evil ideologies, and
Un just sitting there to look the perish of human being without
any act to stop this destruction. Where is UN's power?Why they don't have any strong and solid voice to tell some countries to
stop killing innocient people? If UN say No, then every country must respect and compy otherwise will get consequences. To me , UN is on behaft of human being and it need to use its supreme power to act. These are just my though. How do ya guys think about UN??

10-21-2002, 09:26 PM
The UN is not best used as a world government. It is a forum for dialog and understanding between nations. It should do nothing more than allow nations to come to diplomatic concensus. the idea that the UN should impose its will on sovereign nations is wrong.

10-21-2002, 09:52 PM
FillYourBrain is exactly right. Even though certain people in Europe and in the United States would like to see the United Nations as a supreme over-government, it is not that and should not become that. As great as world democracy and utopian peace sound, they are not currently attainable ideals and so handing power over to the UN would be taking voice away from countries that are already more or less free and democratic and putting it in the hands of despots and farce governments. I certainly do not want to be told how to live by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, China, or Sudan; and I am sure they feel the same way.

To ideology, the great costume of greed and savagery!

10-22-2002, 12:53 AM
>>the idea that the UN should impose its will on sovereign nations is wrong.

The converse should also be true.

But telling the UN that if it does not do what you want 'they are irrelevent' is....

But demanding / threatening another country with 'regime change' else you will bomb it back to the stoneage or starve them out, with or without the UN approval is....

Setting up a world court for crimes against humanity was a good idea until a certain nation demanded 80 nations out of the 78 that signed exclude its citizens from the courts juristriction is.....

(yes 80 out of 78, better to be safe than sorry. Of course not economic incentives were provided)

Supplying a country with millions of dollars of arms every month so it can flaunt UN resolutions (SCR 242 and 338) for 35 years is.....

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." -- U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864

10-22-2002, 03:02 AM
I consider the UN to be an American toy.. And i believe that the UN was established for the US to controll all the other superpowers in the world...

10-22-2002, 03:16 AM
It's a committee with lots of members.

Inevitably, committee's with lots of members talk a lot about procedure and so on, but take years to acheive anything - and by the time it is acheived, it is full of compromises and flights of fancy to satisfy certain members, and by the way, the need for it dissappeared years ago.

There is an old saying - "A camel is a horse designed by a committee".

The EU is going the same way - and with the Irish "Yes" vote to the Nice treaty, is now likely to enlarge the committee.

10-22-2002, 03:37 AM
Have the Irish voted Yes? Haven't heard it in the news?

10-22-2002, 05:18 AM
Yeah they voted 'Yes' to the Nice treaty. Though from what I hear it wasn't the most democratic election ever held.

10-22-2002, 04:11 PM
In years to come, hopefully the UN will be respected and trusted.

Whatever people say,it is NOT a US toy. Far from it in fact. If it was why did the US at least try to gain support to attack Iraq?

I am aware they would have done it anyway!

But, they KNEW they had to seek approval.

We all know that unless we all get together,with someone like the UN, in 50 years we will all be dead. One big happy family government is the way forward.

Nobody will 'take over the world' so to speak, so get behind the UN.

I am aware of the countless cultural,ethical and other difficulties we all face, but we must resolve them. So, that must be a good enough reason to keep the UN.

Call it something else if you wish. Lets just keep it.


10-22-2002, 09:54 PM
>> fountain :: If it was why did the US at least try to gain support to attack Iraq?

They did not go to the UN and say 'Could we do something about Iraq? We have evidence that Sadam is bad, here it is, please help us."

They said 'We are going to attack Iraq. If you don't let us, we will attack anyway and you will be irrelevent."

There is a BIG difference.

Try it on your parents next time you want something and tell me which way works better.

10-23-2002, 07:35 AM
Try it on my parents? What do you mean?

Oh, you mean on pension day..I dont think they would care either way!