Can you give me one legitimate reason for the USA staying a member of the United Nations?

Question

You want reasons why we shouldn't:

Some of the main goals of the UN:

-- take away our Constitutional right to bear arms (yes, all citizens of the US, not just criminals)

-- take away our right to parent our children as we see fit (they think that all children should have open and free access to sexual education and apparatus -- birth control, condoms, etc no matter what their age)

-- the continuous funneling of money to "kleptocracies" -- governments that are supposed to use the aid money for the poor and helpless and instead pocket it for their own personal gain

-- the complete lack of control over the world -- a UN "sanction" means absolutely nothing to a rogue nation

and that is just for starters....

Your reasons of "prestige" and "power" over other countries are meaningless, we would have that without the UN>

Well, so far Bored Lawyer has this one wrapped up. What else you people got, anything besides just staying in order to keep control on the other psychos out there?

Answer 1

At present, the resolutions of the UN Security Council can have mandatory legal effect internationally, and we ought to at least retain our veto-holding position on that Council even if we turn our energies elsewhere (a council of democratic nations, for example). Otherwise, we could run into the problem the Soviets did when they walked out of Security Council sessions only to have the Council authorize a UN-led war against the Communists in Korea; we lose our power to veto resolutions that are contrary to our interests.

A new international council of democratic nations would have greater legitimacy in its actions, because they all would derive ultimately from the people of the member-states. Once such a council was in operation, UN resolutions would lose some of their authority, and the UN could be more safely abandoned to wallow in its corruption and hypocrisy.

Answer 2

Okay, where do you want to start? The United States of America was a founding member of the United Nations during World War II (by signing the Atlantic Charter in 1942 and then the United Nations Charter in 1945), and despite -- or I'd argue because of -- the state of events and the rather unequal representation for dictatorships and democracies in name only, the USA is the only nation with the werewithal to tilt the balance back in the favor of freedom. The United Nations building's on American soil, and unless the USA wants to lose what litle influence it's been able to exert lately (which is actually a lot, despite the news), it'll stay a member because without them, the UN would tear itself apart.

Also, the UN is able to do jobs the USA can't do without playing global supercop; while the USA is the only global superpower as of 2006, only our ability to project power is near-limitless. Humanitarian aid, cultural and social protection, and improving the lifestyles of people in "developing" nations (not the professional beggars and blame-the-West-because-we-refuse-to-lift-ourselves-up, but those places where there is legitimate need) isn't exactly done by Rapid Response Forces. While part of the UN, the USA is able to exert influence to see that what's needed gets to where it's going out of all proportion to its borders.

Also, a peaceful, developing world should be of concern to everyone on Earth. Better to deal with problems of food, water, medicine et. al. while they're in other regions of the world than to deal with angry, starving masses on our borders. The USA is not the UN's pawn in this regard; it's closer to the other way around, for better or for worse.

Answer 3

No, I can't.
Without the United Stated giving them funding, they would collapse! We are the ones giving them the money they need! And all of the things they support are against us!
Ever heard of globalism? the definition is bringing every aspect of our world society under one, universal political system.
Sound good on the surface, right?
Well, dig a little deeper. Globalists hate the United Staes. They are against the traditional family, the Christian church, and national governments (such as the U.S.A).
And they are big supporters of the U.N.

Answer 4

I'm with Bored Lawyer, except for the old saying--keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Heck, we're the only people who actually try to abide by their nonsense.
What I think we really ought to do, rather than withdrawing from the UN, is to stop paying their bills. Let them come up with their own facility instead of the one the US built and maintains for them.
Realistically, if we just did that, they'd fold, cause none of them are gonna keep up the farce if it costs THEM money.

Answer 5

We are in the UN, it's host, and have more influence on the UN than any other member state. There is three, can you give one legitimate reason as to why we shouldn't?

Answer 6

Because the USA doesn't own the world.

Answer 7

nope we should do our own thing,we seem to get involved with all the other crap out there,worry about us we have alot to fix here before everyone else is helped...p.s pass me a grey goose martini please,stop being so greedy

Answer 8

Because without us there to veto, who knows what kinds of crazy things our "allies" would vote to do?

Answer 9

we shouldnt. we should get the heck out of there ASAP.

They should be called the feckless toothless snark NATIONS

Answer 10

'YES'....prestige.....and a place for 'spy' net-workING.....and also a place to observe the other nations protocalls.....