Posted on Aug 30, 2015
Has the United Nations outlived its usefulness in World Order or does it need to be reorganized?
26.3K
487
169
50
50
0
Has the United Nations outlived its usefulness in World Order or does it need to be reorganized?
The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organization to promote international co-operation. A replacement for the ineffective League of Nations, the organization was established on 24 October 1945 following the Second World War to prevent another such conflict. At its founding, the UN had 51 member states; there are now 193. The headquarters of the United Nations is in Manhattan, New York City, and experiences extraterritoriality.
Do we give the institution more power or do we dismantle it?
Do we come up with a new World Organization that brings the countries together for world issues and what does that look like?
Do we go back to the days before the United Nations and the League of Nations in 1920 prior to WW1 and let each country work out their own issues, create its own treaties and alliances, and solve its own problems (and if another country comes to their aid so be it)?
CAPT Michael MoranSGT (Join to see)Dennis AubuchonCH (CPT) James L. Machado WorkmanSSG Alan PelletierMSgt Rich MedinaSSG David AndrewsJeremiah McMillanSGT Mia MasonSFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]]Letise DennisPV2 J MCPO Nate S.PO2 David KeenerCMSgt William ReedPO3 Grant Skiles
The United Nations (UN) is an intergovernmental organization to promote international co-operation. A replacement for the ineffective League of Nations, the organization was established on 24 October 1945 following the Second World War to prevent another such conflict. At its founding, the UN had 51 member states; there are now 193. The headquarters of the United Nations is in Manhattan, New York City, and experiences extraterritoriality.
Do we give the institution more power or do we dismantle it?
Do we come up with a new World Organization that brings the countries together for world issues and what does that look like?
Do we go back to the days before the United Nations and the League of Nations in 1920 prior to WW1 and let each country work out their own issues, create its own treaties and alliances, and solve its own problems (and if another country comes to their aid so be it)?
CAPT Michael MoranSGT (Join to see)Dennis AubuchonCH (CPT) James L. Machado WorkmanSSG Alan PelletierMSgt Rich MedinaSSG David AndrewsJeremiah McMillanSGT Mia MasonSFC James William Bolt [ 40 Yards ]]Letise DennisPV2 J MCPO Nate S.PO2 David KeenerCMSgt William ReedPO3 Grant Skiles
Edited 7 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 81
It needs to go the way of the League of Nations. It is worse than useless; it is a place that allows repressive regimes to run human rights commissions and other such nonsense. Its peacekeepers cannot keep the peace and simply become targets until they retreat, and its inspectors and sanctions managers are typically bribed by those supposedly being sanctioned.
They have the same effect as six wolves and a sheep voting on what's for super; the repressive regimes outnumber the responsible ones.
They have the same effect as six wolves and a sheep voting on what's for super; the repressive regimes outnumber the responsible ones.
(49)
(0)
LTC John Griscom
Aside from its ineffectiveness, how many investigations have been done into the corrupt operations, to include UNICEF years ago, of the people selected to "manage" financial aspects of the UN?
(4)
(0)
CPT Carl Daschke
Not only is the UN ineffective but the United States pays 22% of the annual costs and, has since the organizations inception. What have we, as citizens, realized from the enormous costs other than one UN failure after another. I was proud of President Trump's speech today - it was long, long overdue. Time to pack up our marbles and go home. Turn the UN building into a VA center!
(4)
(0)
PFC Eric Parrish
I concur ! It is also serves as a forum for despots and repressive nations to try to influence American domestic issues. It's design is in support of the failed idea of a one world government that penalizes productive countries and hopes to redistribute wealth.
(1)
(0)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs The UN is a great idea, poorly executed.
The UN gives the symbolic representation to the world is working to solve problems, when in reality the UN is a bunch of self-interested people serving themselves engaged in cronyism.
It provides the gloss or cover of legitimacy without the action and passion behind it.
Governments are made legitimate via the social contract that exists with the population of the nation. In the US we have a direct election for Congress and indirect for the President via the electors within the Republican system.
The UN has NO members directly elected by anyone, these representatives are appointed. Nothing in the US constitution speaks to the enumerated powers vested in a supra-national government.
The UN is not a legitimate government and represents NO ONE.
You have some people like CPT (Join to see) that see problems in the world and want to resolve these issues. Great idea, we want to solve world problems now!
The UN is not granted the power, resources or authority to resolve any world problem but because it exists, some people assume that it may actually have the ability to do it.
ANY power, resources or authority granted will be LOST to the people who need it because the money will be redirected through the bureaucracy.
In summary, the UN does not solve problems, not legitimate, all resources provided are shamelessly redirected to the benefit of the politically connected. Good hearted people are misled.
The UN gives the symbolic representation to the world is working to solve problems, when in reality the UN is a bunch of self-interested people serving themselves engaged in cronyism.
It provides the gloss or cover of legitimacy without the action and passion behind it.
Governments are made legitimate via the social contract that exists with the population of the nation. In the US we have a direct election for Congress and indirect for the President via the electors within the Republican system.
The UN has NO members directly elected by anyone, these representatives are appointed. Nothing in the US constitution speaks to the enumerated powers vested in a supra-national government.
The UN is not a legitimate government and represents NO ONE.
You have some people like CPT (Join to see) that see problems in the world and want to resolve these issues. Great idea, we want to solve world problems now!
The UN is not granted the power, resources or authority to resolve any world problem but because it exists, some people assume that it may actually have the ability to do it.
ANY power, resources or authority granted will be LOST to the people who need it because the money will be redirected through the bureaucracy.
In summary, the UN does not solve problems, not legitimate, all resources provided are shamelessly redirected to the benefit of the politically connected. Good hearted people are misled.
(35)
(0)
SGM Steve Wettstein
LTC John Shaw -Sir that is exactly what I did. I sponsored a child through Compassion International. Thank you very much for the suggestion!
(2)
(0)
LTC John Shaw
SGM Steve Wettstein Awesome! It is a great organization, so far they seem to use money wisely.
(0)
(0)
I worked for the UN in NY from 2008 to 2011, and I can say that the UN is not what it is cracked to be. Laws are only passed based on the member countries who agree to use what ever comes up during the General Assembly. The Security Council in which the 5 main permanent countries, (which are the same allied nations since WWII, which is UK, US, Russia, France, and China)... With 10 others who are voted in, but the majority votes come from whether the permanent members allow it. It is a dog and pony show for that place, and the US is the biggest contributor in funding at almost 23% of its financial deficit, the second largest is Japan at almost 11%, with only 3 other countries in the single digits, leaving the other countries at .005% for contributions...
Because it is such a controversial organizations, it is limited on power and can only use the Security Council to make laws that only benefit what is sees fit, and the General Assembly (GA) uses its two yearly functions to address matters that universally will be used worldwide, but its no guarantee. If you think about all rules and laws that apply such as the Geneva Convention, other countries that are members of the UN don't follow the rules or policies but are not even punished or expelled from the member seat.. So goes to show how political the UN really is...
Because it is such a controversial organizations, it is limited on power and can only use the Security Council to make laws that only benefit what is sees fit, and the General Assembly (GA) uses its two yearly functions to address matters that universally will be used worldwide, but its no guarantee. If you think about all rules and laws that apply such as the Geneva Convention, other countries that are members of the UN don't follow the rules or policies but are not even punished or expelled from the member seat.. So goes to show how political the UN really is...
(29)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
The UN is not a government and makes absolutely no laws. It's resolutions are only as binding as the countries allow on themselves. Smaller, less rich and less militarily capable countries can feel the pressure a little more.
Veto power only exists in the SC, not the GA.
Veto power only exists in the SC, not the GA.
(2)
(0)
GySgt Melissa Gravila
It seems to me that since it is basically a group of cronies, it would stand to reason that it is easily corrupted and does not benefit those it was originally intended to. When an entity attempts to force its beliefs on another, there ceases to be a democracy and becomes a dictatorship and should be disbanded.
Just my $.02
S/F
Just my $.02
S/F
(2)
(0)
Maj John D Benedict
Thanks SGT Edward Jahnke, it's pretty disappointing to hear the USA pays so much, and doesn't get a proportional vote. Don't get me wrong, I don't think the USA has all the great ideas. But hearing what other countries pay, and the amount of whining some of them do makes me think those really need a muzzle.
I don't think we should pull out of the UN, as that would leave Israel with no cover. But I do think some other nations need to cough up some finances. I was glad to hear Mr. Trump's speech; some nations need to be put on notice.
I don't think we should pull out of the UN, as that would leave Israel with no cover. But I do think some other nations need to cough up some finances. I was glad to hear Mr. Trump's speech; some nations need to be put on notice.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next