Do you think the UN is worthy organization?

[ballz2wallz]

Do you think the UN is a worthy organization as it is today? Do you think its word is worthy of paying attention to?

[Ardentfrost]

You need a "not just no, but hell no" option

[Kytro]

Worthy is vague, but I understand what you are getting at.

The UN is problematic and very bureaucratic, hence tends to be somewhat ineffective in certain areas, but much of the work done there is on value.

So in effect it depends on what the UN is dealing with and at what level.

[Rouger2]

I think people should be careful of what they wish for. Do people really want a strong UN. Well all we would have to do is give up our veto rights, along with the rest of the major countries that are allowed veto power. That would put the whole world under the UN and we would really have our one world order. The place is a good place for people to stand up and yell at each other and get things off their chests. It is the fear of the unknown that often causes conflict but if you can look at you enemy and yell at him, he is a known, and causes less fear and that is something the UN provides. I don't expect the Un to be strong and am glad it is not.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by Rouger2

I think people should be careful of what they wish for. Do people really want a strong UN. Well all we would have to do is give up our veto rights, along with the rest of the major countries that are allowed veto power.

All that would do is enable the world opinion to be more accurately reflected.

Originally Posted by Rouger2

That would put the whole world under the UN and we would really have our one world order. The place is a good place for people to stand up and yell at each other and get things off their chests. It is the fear of the unknown that often causes conflict but if you can look at you enemy and yell at him, he is a known, and causes less fear and that is something the UN provides. I don't expect the Un to be strong and am glad it is not.

The UN wouldn't be able to force the US to do something, or Israel even with a binding resolution. In order for it to be strong, it would need a standing army

[Donkey®]

Just like any other good idea, it's execution is the problem.

[RMNIXON]

It should be a place for all Nations to meet and debate in public. But stop trying to play world government.

[6SpeedTA95]

Keyword being "today"

I do not think it is a worthy organization today. Rampant corruption, no spine, picking and choosing countries to screw over....

[avsp]

Its worthwhile, ..., but possibly too worthy

its all we've got

It difficulty in reaching decisions &/or enforceing them is because of the nature of humans & were it able to enforce its edict i suspect that many more here would explode in apoletic anger.

Not having it would mean that each & every crisis would have to go thru an extra talks about talks fingy.

besides which smallpox is a massive win for the UN & much else.

The horror of the idea of monitoring stuff like SARS without the existing structure provided by the UN is a good enough reason to keep it

[JaJae]

The UN is more corrupt and than our own government. The UN acts as a shield to places like North Korea, Iran Palestine, Israel, etc, essentially protecting them from the world coming down on them for their behavior.

The UN essentially allows things the like Sudan to take place by not doing anything about it and being an entity the world's nations must go through. They have not increased peace-keeping in the world since their inception. Rather they have acted as a buffer to allow it to continue. There's a fine line between how much the UN helps and how much damage it has done to the world. I agree with the concept, but everyone involved with Kofi on down needs to be replaced. Kofi should have been kicked out of his position long ago through all the corruption.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Keyword being "today"

I do not think it is a worthy organization today. Rampant corruption, no spine, picking and choosing countries to screw over....

If the problems were fixed and the UN given an extreme home makeover I think it is a very good organization. I think it is healthy to have group of nations together working through diplomacy in one organized location. I believe the UN contributes in many ways including avoiding war and getting nations to collectively agree on things like weapons inspections for Iraq. One problem like you mentioned is spine. If there was a collective group, not just the US basically, Saddam would have probably complied long ago and this current war avoided.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by JaJae

The UN is more corrupt and than our own government. The UN acts as a shield to places like North Korea, Iran Palestine, Israel, etc, essentially protecting them from the world coming down on them for their behavior.

The UN essentially allows things the like Sudan to take place by not doing anything about it and being an entity the world's nations must go through. They have not increased peace-keeping in the world since their inception. Rather they have acted as a buffer to allow it to continue. There's a fine line between how much the UN helps and how much damage it has done to the world. I agree with the concept, but everyone involved with Kofi on down needs to be replaced. Kofi should have been kicked out of his position long ago through all the corruption.

It takes other countries in the UN to vote to "shield" NK, Iran, etc. That to me implies that the entire world is not coming down on them. I agree that the stuff in Sudan and the lack of action is horse shit, but its other countries that are part of this organization that are not doing anything. The UN as an entity is not necessarily responsible, but the members of the UN who vote certain ways or do not take actions.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

It takes other countries in the UN to vote to "shield" NK, Iran, etc. That to me implies that the entire world is not coming down on them. I agree that the stuff in Sudan and the lack of action is horse shit, but its other countries that are part of this organization that are not doing anything. The UN as an entity is not necessarily responsible, but the members of the UN who vote certain ways or do not take actions.

The UN has a military at its disposal. They are supposed to handle such things as Sudan. That is its purpose. I agree that its the contributing nations/politics/corruption that's causing the problems. But the UN is a union of these countries. So by default, it is the UN's fault. If the collective countries that are a part of it are corrupt and non-effectual, then the UN by default is a lame, pathetic organization which literally does more harm to the world than good for no reason other than it is an authoritative body that hinders other countries from taking steps towards fixing the world's issues.

[Rouger2]

Originally Posted by Kytro

All that would do is enable the world opinion to be more accurately reflected.
I think the UN accurately reflects the opinion of the majority. the second and third world countries of the world. Second world countiries are economically in between the rich and poor.


The UN wouldn't be able to force the US to do something, or Israel even with a binding resolution. In order for it to be strong, it would need a standing army

Yes I should have said we would have to give them control of our armed forces or some of them anyway, not just do away with our veto power. I believe that would eventually lead to us being just a state in a one world order.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by Rouger2

Yes I should have said we would have to give them control of our armed forces or some of them anyway, not just do away with our veto power. I believe that would eventually lead to us being just a state in a one world order.

This will happen sooner or later (world wars etc notwithstanding)

[motivez]

Holy lack of details in the original post batman!

I think that the UN needs major overhauls, the idea of a veto and having permanent members being one of them. I mean, France? Come on.

Anyway, with the economy being global and nations being so linked because of how small the world is today, some sort of international organizational body is needed IMO.

Europe has one and I think it serves them well, I think the globe could benefit from one as well.. but the UN needs major overhauls.