do you think the UN should be abolished?

Answer 1

Yes. It is ineffective and corrupt. There needs to be something but the UN is not it.

Answer 2

No. It's still worthwhile to have a forum for nations, even if it isn't as effective as we wish it would be. The fact that it isn't always in line with what the U.S. government wants is no reason to abolish it or pull out. For all the complaints about the U.N. I don't think it's done the U.S. any real damage or forced the U.S.' hand in any way that matters. It's just another target that's been set up by right-wing pundits and political handlers for their followers to hate. That's to support our hard-line foreign policy.

If we continue that foreign policy someday we're going to regret it as the EU and China become more powerful economic and military players. The Americans who constantly say the U.N. should be abolished think that the U.S. will keep its tremendous superiority forever. As an American I would like to think that's true but as a student of history it's pretty unlikely. We shouldn't antagonize our allies or create more enemies without pretty good reasons or dissolve the best forum for nations to attempt to work out civilized solutions to disputes in a public forum.

Answer 3

No, they should be moved to the Freedom tower that will replace the WTC. They should be forced to pass the memorial to the people who died on 9/11 because they are too corrupt and feckless to do the jobs they are supposed to do.

There should be a constant reading of the names of the victims into every room of the new UN headquarters.

Every UN meeting should begin with a slide presentation of all the victims.

Answer 4

The reason so many people on this forum answered "no" has to be based on the fact that they have never seen the US record of vetoed votes in the UN. Vetoes that would have cut dramatically WMD's and possible interventions that would have provided peace instead of an opportunity for the US to commit acts of terrorism. Do your homework people...this information is out there.

Answer 5

I don't think it should be abolished, it just has to make itself a bit more powerful. With the US and Israel involved and vetoing all resolutions that are vital for peace, they will never make a difference. They need a better reinforcement place when to comes to the resolutions that have passed and have not been followed. (by Israel mostly). Don't take my word for it, do some research. You'll see.

Answer 6

No, UN is doing pretty good job at keeping peace, it is just some country that doesn't obey it, including N. Korea, Iraq, USA, Iran. When the world get united, there will be less conflict. More states will result in more war.

Answer 7

No, and just for the record neither do all the people screaming against it right now. Like everything else, when it doesn't work in their favor it is time for it to go but when we need them we are the first ones to sit down and talk (such as with the North Korea situation going on right now!).

Answer 8

Yes!! Unless they could just change the ones involved in the oil for food scandal, and the ones who do nothing. Hummm, I think the top 5 might do the trick.

Answer 9

Definitely Not. It's a step in the right direction we just are still too primitive to be truly cooperative but it's important to continue to try.

Answer 10

No because it really helps different countries come together and use diplomacy. It really helps out with dealing with different government, but I have to admit it can be a pain in the butt sometimes