If the USA threw the UN out of New York, it would likely decamp to Brussels (home of NATO, Council of Europe and capital of the European Union). I can't see the UN going anywhere else although I suspect one of the other Security Council members would offer to host it:- maybe London or Paris.
If the USA did this then they could either stay in the UN or leave.
If they decided to stay then I don't see much change from the status quo except everyone would decamp to another country. The USA might lose a bit of influence, but as it is still the most powerful economy in the Security Council and NATO, it would still be most able to act unilaterally in its own interest regarding world affairs. After all, no government in their right mind is going to stand up militarily to the US as has been seen in Afghanistan and Iraq.
If the USA were to leave, I guess the pro argument (from the US point of view) would be that they would be more able to act in whatever way they wished in world affairs, whether that be to withdraw completely from any world involvement or to force their will upon other countries with military backup.
I can't see a pro argument for the USA leaving from other countries' point of view. The vast majority of countries look to the USA for world leadership, which is why they are trying so hard to get the USA onboard the Kyoto Protocol. The idea that any world issue can be resolved without the USA being onboard is naïve.
The main argument against the USA leaving the UN would be that it would set a precedent for other countries to follow. No doubt Russia and Israel would quickly follow suit so that they could go their own way in solving their own internal and external security problems. Maybe China, India, Brazil and the other big emerging markets would leave as well.
I think what would be left would be Europe, South East Asia and Africa as these are the states that have most to gain out of the UN. Maybe Canada would stay as they are much more into consensus politics than is the USA, but the majority of others would leave.
The problem with this scenario is that world security, on a general level, would rapidly decrease, as there would be no supranational body to keep a check on the power of every country's government. There would be little consensus in world politics as countries went their own way politically. What we would be left with is a situation not much different from Europe pre-WW1, but on a global scale. The world would be governed by alliances between countries forming themselves into loose power blocs rather than with an overarching polity keeping a check on this.
As was seen in Sarajevo in 1914, the smallest action could trigger a conflict of massive proportions if there is no supranational body to keep watch. It took Europe until 1945 to realise that to stop a continual threat of war, some form of integration was needed to prevent war between countries. What we have seen in Europe since 1945 is truly amazing. Old enemies now resolve disputes in offices rather than on the battlefield. As a result the European citizen has a more secure life, is free to travel, free to say what he/she thinks... we've never had it so good.
Conversely, if there is no UN, then markets would likely collapse or depreciate due to a lack of security and the lives of people all over the world would no doubt get much harder.
Chris, Manchester, North-West England, United Kingdom, Europe.
2006-11-21 01:28:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
All those nations that never pay their share to support the UN would condem the US and label us a war mongers. Then, one of two things would happen. There would be a frantic move to restore the UN and it would gain more respect, or, those nations who really don't give a crap would joyfully let it die so they could do what they want and then condem the US for the fact there was no UN to help.
2006-11-21 00:17:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by brucenjacobs 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
it would not be in favor of the US. If we are positioning ourselves as the harborers of peace and human development and we expel the entity that protects those rights , we would look like a government that does not lead the world nor supports those activities .
I do no think that there are any pros is such an action was taken at this point in time .
2006-11-21 00:17:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by interested 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
The UN has degenerated into a self serving debating society .
Every dictator , tyrant , Drug lord and scum bag has a voice there .
Did you know they want to impose an income tax on America , not everybody , just America ?
2006-11-21 02:17:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well the best thing would be if we also quit the UN. Then convert that property into lowincome apartments which are badly needed right now. We wouldn't have drunkem ambassadors oweing millions in parking/speeding tickets every years. The various crimes their families commit would go away.
There really is no down side to them leaving really.
2006-11-21 00:16:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by netnazivictim 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
The main pro is that we would likely get kicked out of it.
The main con is that we would likely get kicked out of it.
The UN is just a country club for people who want to destroy freedom. Whether we are in or out they will plot our destruction in the USA by attempting to make the world a single entity, rather than many entities combined.
2006-11-21 00:20:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by El Pistolero Negra 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
A billion dollar piece of property would be able to be developed for the American peoples interest. Less unpaid parking tickets in NY. No more foreign dignitaries who eat out and don't even tip 5 percent. In all it would be peace on earth.
2006-11-21 00:38:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
The pro would be the UN building could be made into condos
The Con is what other nation would homebase the UN?
2006-11-21 00:16:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Franklin Roosevelt was president when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and thousands died. Oh, and by the way, you don't need the "most" in front of "deadliest", since it is already in its superlative form.
2016-03-29 04:06:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who gives a flying cow patty what the ramifies would be...
The majority of the UN members are so anti-US , so the hell with them....
The sooner WE get out, and the UN is disbanded, the better the world would be...
2006-11-21 00:35:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by donrentf 3
·
3⤊
1⤋