How effective was the League of Nations compared to the United Nations?

Question

.

Answer 1

Considering that the US really never bought into the League of Nations, in spite of President Wilson's efforts, it was never really effective.

The United Nations is only as effective as the nations who participate and do not participate.

Answer 2

because the communist-socialist US authorities feeds its electorate 7,500,000 litres of state-mandated Coke each and each and every 12 months. Little do the human beings comprehend that the authorities isn't somewhat a democracy, they haven't any actual freedom and the Coke is a secret drug that guarantees that Americas love their u . s . adequate to in no way let their "outstanding" authorities fail. And when you drink Pepsi, Pepsi is somewhat owned by Coke and has an same recipe. persons that don't like Coke/Pepsi have the substance injected into their places of position of residing by authorities brokers noted as "Jehova's Witnesses" to cause them to believe it. This project as been occurring for 100 years. the eastern were the in problem-free words human beings ever to locate this, and that is the reason they attacked Pearl Harbor in WWII. After the warfare, the eastern were made to vow they does no longer tell all people about the reality about the individuals. They advised the North Koreans presently after Hiroshima which replaced into the authentic reason that Nagasaki replaced into bombed. And the North Koreans (who were somewhat already seperate) advised the South Koreans in 1949, that is why the Allies were in contact contained in the Korean warfare. The South Koreans on the instantaneous "forgot" (the US gave all of them Fanta that's somewhat a memory-wiping drug) and the North Koreans purely grew to change into right into a Stalinist communist state and in no way advised all people over concern of yet another warfare. the US replaced into in the back of the present sinking of a South Korean warship- North Korea gave tricks to China about the secret and the sinking replaced right into a publicity stunt to get the Koreans adversarial to at least one yet another. and those violent crime charges are reported crime charges. more effective ought to nicely be more effective because it signifies that the police gadget is operating right.

Answer 3

No difference. Both exists just to deal with minor problems.

No effect to big problems.

League os Nations did nothing during first facists invasion in Africa (36) neither during Poland invasion. If something happened at that time, we would not have WWII.

Answer 4

it was effective in their time.it was founded to give the wolrd a concensus and also a foro where all the nations could go and solve their diferences and conflicts but you know the rest,it's been always "democraticly" control by the U.S or the group of 7 more develope nations,there's no room for countries like cuba or trinidad and tobago.we need a new order,no more comission,just order,freedon and real democracy.

Answer 5

Since the UN is not a democratic institution, it is ineffective. The UN nurtures the concept of "Super Citizens" by way of empowering only 5 nations the power of veto.

Imagine, that the US constitution saying that the "white" population has the right to VETO the wishes/votes of the "black" population since they are poor, not that knowledgeable etc etc.!

Answer 6

Arguably not as effective as it lacked one important feature - no military force. The L of N could make all the decisions it wanted to but if it had no military force, how could it make anyone comply? The UN has military capacity and lives by the rule 'an attack on one of the members is an attack on all members'.

Answer 7

Both of the organization are basically tools to serve the objectives of the "big boys".

Answer 8

About the same - useless.

Answer 9

WW II