Jump to content

Is the UN still relevant?


MAR

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

Yes.

 

The world has changed since WW2. The UN requires reform to ensure it still has influence and power.

It still serves an important purpose in peace keeping, disaster relief, and humanitarian issues.

It gives small countries, minorities, etc. a voice.

And probably most importantly, it allows for open communication and dialogue between nations.

 

I think the world would be worse off without the UN. I know that statement is hard to prove or quantify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much agree with RIPS. In the last 7 years or so, the UN has really shown to be ineffectual on a number of conflicts around the globe.

 

One example being during the Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah crisis in 2006, in which there were UN posts in Southern Lebanon that did absolutely nothing as Hezbollah kidnapped Israeli troops and lobbed missiles in to Israel.

 

Same with the US ignoring the Security Council veto on invading Iraq. No punishments of any kind seemed to be imposed on the US.

 

It seemed pretty effective in the early beginning with the Korean War conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the UN really should be focused on empowering the third world, in particular Africa, through microcredit instead of funding the countries dictators directly.

 

I think they are ineffectual in their peacekeeping efforts and frankly at times they worsen the situation. I remember hearing something about UN peacekeeping forces contributing the a rise in prostitution in the countries they are in.

 

Overall, i think it would make sense to restructure the UN to be a humanitarian force rather than policing entity. I doubt any of the nations involved would be interested because helping people doesnt make your dick look bigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ginger Bread Man

the US has publicly and repeatedly gone against UN orders thereby undermining its' authority.

 

once anyone defies authority and nothing is done others are sure to follow suite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The UN is only relevant in addressing global security insofar as it supports the US agenda. As we have seen when the UN does not go along with the US in security matters the US will act unilaterally, there can be no punitive action taken by the UN against the US because the UN is only powerful when it acts as a conduit for US power.

 

In humanitarian and aid areas it is probably relevant. It is only relevant in security matters in the way it confers legitimacy in confronting those that act against US interests, IE most people will think if the UN imposes sanctions on a 'rogue state' like DPRK or Iran then they must deserve it, where as people are a lot more skeptical if the US acts unilaterally in the same manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — Researchers should determine whether United Nations peacekeepers were the source of a deadly outbreak of cholera in Haiti, two public health experts, including a U.N. official, said Wednesday.

 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that the strain of cholera that has killed at least 442 people the past three weeks matches strains found in South Asia. The CDC, World Health Organization and United Nations say it’s not possible to pinpoint the source and investigating further would distract from efforts to fight the disease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The question is problematic in the first place.

 

Are you talking about the WFP, UNESCO, UNSC, UNGA, etc. etc.?

 

Some parts of the UN do a lot of good work, other parts like the UNSC are a power playground.

 

I gather you are talking about the UN Security Council and if it is irrelevant why are countries like India, Brazil, etc. trying to get a seat there? Why is China blocking resolutions on DPRK and Sudan, why is the US blocking resolutions on Isael, why is Russia blocking resolutions on Iran? IF it was irrelevant none of this stuff would happen as countries would not waste their time.

 

It's not irrelevant, it's just irrelevant to the original cause, which was to stop wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Oh god, here goes that stupid NWO order shit again.

 

For fuck sake, read about the global balance of power, you have no idea of how badly you are barking up the wrong tree by quoting Bush after the fall of the USSR.

 

However, I am not at all surprised that you are. Mental pollution.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more irrelevant in the sense that it has little to no power to stop wars. I see it as a place for countries to posture and play games. And yeah the UNSC is kind of a joke.

 

Whilst in pursuit of its original purpose the UNSC is not at all relevant don't be too quick to write it off, lots of serious shit still goes on there and it is where the balance of power is played out in the open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...