The United Nations

[Axeman]

Oppinions on the United Nations range from evil demonic being seeking only to aid the infedels in thier quest of world dominance and control, to the most benevolant organization ever created which champions everything virtuous.

Thoughts on the UN anybody?

[CtrlAltDe1337]

UN = bad idea imo. The Senate was right in not joining the League of Nations (precursor to UN) back when it was founded and I wish the UN would be disbanded.

[Tajir]

Very useful and productive organization when it comes to humanitarian work and development in poor nations, but as a peace-bringing or peace-keeping force, its useless.

The modern world would be hell without the UN. But I still oppose nation-states in general, so I partially believe that the UN is fixing problems that were started by its initial supporters.

[Carach]

UN = bad idea imo. The Senate was right in not joining the League of Nations (precursor to UN) back when it was founded and I wish the UN would be disbanded.

had it been a member of the LoN ww2 may not even have occured...

but hey

[Georgy Zhukov]

IT prevents major wars, tough it is not equal heavily biased and focuses on some large powers, instead of power distributed equally. I don't like it very much.

[Holger Danske]

IT prevents major wars, tough it is not equal heavily biased and focuses on some large powers, instead of power distributed equally. I don't like it very much.

No, massive nuclear arsenals prevents that... that, and no way of defending yourself against thousands of incoming ICBMs.

[Paul d]

your name is dreadfully ironic with that post...

[bushbush]

hm...i dont know...so far the collective security mechanism has worked better than pretty much all other systems in the history...in terms of preventing wars among major powers.

what are the alternatives?

balance of power? (we all know how that turned out in history )

[CtrlAltDe1337]

hm...i dont know...so far the collective security mechanism has worked better than pretty much all other systems in the history...in terms of preventing wars among major powers.

what are the alternatives?

balance of power? (we all know how that turned out in history )

Give the USA all the nukes and rename the US Military into World Police

[bushbush]

Give the USA all the nukes and rename the US Military into World Police

then china will become the minority in US.

china: "hello officer, what's the problem"

police:"suspect gets belligerent"

china :"no i didn't, i was just saying..."

police: "armed resistance"

china:"no i didn't..."

police: "officer down"!

[Oberbefehlshaber]

then china will become the minority in US.

china: "hello officer, what's the problem"

police:"suspect gets belligerent"

china :"no i didn't, i was just saying..."

police: "armed resistance"

china:"no i didn't..."

police: "officer down"!

China already is a minorty in the eyes of U.S citizens.

[Oberbefehlshaber]

Give the USA all the nukes and rename the US Military into World Police

What are you talking about the U.S already calls themselfs the world police, and their organization is funded by me.

[Каие]

What do you expect from an organisation which has its seat in New York and is chaired by the winners of World War two who are all nuclear powers and the non-permanent members votes are worth nothing as the big 5 can veto anything.

Oh yeah, also it has no Army, how is it supposed to keep up with 21 st century diplomacy, sorry my mistake ultimatum and War and Nuclear threats.

[Carach]

Oh yeah, also it has no Army, how is it supposed to keep up with 21 st century diplomacy, sorry my mistake ultimatum and War and Nuclear threats.

Actually, one of the main differences between the UN and its predecessor the LoN is that the UN does have its own forces - contributed to by member nations; hence the dozens of UN peace keeping forces around the world, kb8.

and tbh, an organisation that makes luxembourg equally important as the US, China etc would be a horrible failure...

[wilting]

The UN is a venue where states meet and/or cooperate. Nothing more. What it can and cannot do depends on what member states agree to. I don't see what is wrong with it. Better to have a house than to have to pitch a new tent every time something comes up.

[Heinz Guderian]

The UN is an organisation you want to get a green light from before invading a country.

If you dont get that green light... it...invade anyway.

Its a stick that you can beat the weak with. But not the big boys.

[Каие]

Actually, one of the main differences between the UN and its predecessor the LoN is that the UN does have its own forces - contributed to by member nations; hence the dozens of UN peace keeping forces around the world, kb8.

Hardly, i hardly call a glorified police force, which has no powers to fire their rifles or actually do any policing, can be called an army.

and tbh, an organisation that makes luxembourg equally important as the US, China etc would be a horrible failure...

Thats exactly why the UN is bull, the big boys don;t have to listen but force others to listen.

[Carach]

Hardly, i hardly call a glorified police force, which has no powers to fire their rifles or actually do any policing, can be called an army.

well that is what it is, and they have helped bring peace to many dodgey areas.

I dont like the UN, and there have of course been failures. However, there has always been meetings between great powers with the interests of maintaining peace; the UN is just a global one with the great powers at its head.

[Каие]

well that is what it is, and they have helped bring peace to many dodgey areas

Except Darfur, Rwanda and Sebrenica, when the going gets tough the UN soldiers run away.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

The UN will be of little worth as a peacekeeping entity until the nation-state ceases to be a reality. It's just another discussion hall that does not absolutely prevent countries to arm themselves and attack others freely as they did always.