2007-01-11 04:39:36 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Without the UN's intervention, Pakistan and India probably would have gone to war years ago- possibly with global consequences, since they both have nuclear technology that almost certainly would have been further developed without the UN's intervention. Throw North Korea into the mix and it escalates into a regional conflict in a hurry.
I would say that the fact that there has not been a major regional conflict since WWII is a pretty good track record. Certainly unprecendented in recent world history. Miraculous, given the U.S. constantly meddling in the affairs of others, which has always led to increased conflict and human suffering when we did not have U.N. backing. Though I suppose you can't credit them for preventing something that never happened any more than GWB can take credit for the lack of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9-11.
2007-01-11 05:49:27 · answer #1 · answered by kena2mi 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN has not been able to prevent, stop, or improve the situations in any conflict that they have been involved in since the conception of the organization. As a whole the idea and the group is a huge failure and it should be disbanded. As for the guy saying that the un prevented Germany from further aggressing after WWII. That was the US and Great Britain yet again. France, the panty waists they are, crumbled even while they were helping occupy the country, when no war was going on.
2007-01-11 12:52:41 · answer #2 · answered by PDK 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None as far as I know. They tried in Korea and it didn't work. Since then they have gone in several countries to help, but pulled out because everyone turned on them. They boost that they are there to help. Help who? One side? The side they want in power?
Just look back at the 90's. They couldn't stop one war.
The UN is a joke, as was the League of Nations. The League of Nations was formed after WWI. Look what it got us.
2007-01-11 20:10:15 · answer #3 · answered by pgmurry 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None. They are usually the cause of conflict: either by criminal neglect or by directly giving power to those who should be punished.
Get the US out of the UN and UN out of the US!
2007-01-11 12:52:04 · answer #4 · answered by C D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
as nearly as we can tell, absolutely none. And it has fomented a few, and wasted a whale of a lot of money. It is only the unanimous support of the press and the Israeli lobby that have kept us in there this long. And now that the U.N. has made some noises critical of Israel. Just maybe we will have an attack of sanity and quit supporting that rotten establishment.
2007-01-11 12:45:30 · answer #5 · answered by hasse_john 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ZERO, the UN is a paper tiger. Annan and its previous leaders have been so wrapped in corruption all they can do is blame all the worlds evils on America. Though they themselves perpertrate a vast majority of the evils.
2007-01-11 12:44:30 · answer #6 · answered by bmw4909 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
They only postpone conflicts long enough to give the evil side a chance to build up its army and hide its WMD.
2007-01-11 12:48:00 · answer #7 · answered by El Pistolero Negra 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did the UN have anything to do with the Cuban missile crisis?
2007-01-11 14:33:09 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
2 chicks fighting in the UN office washroom?
2007-01-11 12:46:27 · answer #9 · answered by uzurhead 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None...
The UN is a corrupt useless organization...
2007-01-11 12:43:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋