Why shouldn't the US undertake any military action against another country without support from from the UN?

Question

The answers to this are very important. So if there are any sources from where your answer(s) is from, then please post the link to the site with your answer. Please and thank you!!!

Answer 1

America is a sovereign nation and we have a right to protect ourselves!! America was attacked on 9/11 and we have a right to bring the perpetrators to justice, with or without UN approval.

Answer 2

Trying to get support from the UN is damned near impossible. The UN idea intitally, had a lot of promise and merit. It consisted of country's that truly stuck together, but that was over fifty years ago. Today the UN is like a trailer park, there is so much trash and ulterior motives floating in and out of the assembly that it is dead in it's tracks.

The demise of the UN was most apparent last year when that hideous illiterate from Venezuela got to the podium and started comparing the president of the US with the devil. Why would any world body tolerate those antics from the likes of Hugo Chavez, a socialist and Castro wannabe who has destroyed the infrastrucure of a beautiful country, Venezuela.

The world at large can no longer rely on the UN to act in it's best interest after seeing the loss of decorum following Chavez. The US must do what it believes to be in the best interest of the world at large, without UN support. The best thing the US and other responsible nations must do, is disban the UN and form a new body, but leave the trailer trash to fend for themselves.

Answer 3

My question to you is why do you feel the US needs support from the UN? The UN is nothing more than a lame forum where member countries can air their grievances to one another. Do not forget that the UN is also corrupt; just look at Kofi Annan and the Oil for Food Program that put millions into the pockets of he and his son. Too many people think that the UN is the world gov't and it has the say as to whether its member nations conduct legal or illegal activities; that is 100% false. The US and other member nations never gave up their sovereignty when they signed the UN Charter. Additionally, they did not agree to be bound by UN rules that conflict with their own national interests and security. I would like to recommend a book to you, The Insider's Guide to the UN. It was written by Linda Fasulo, she was a UN insider for many years and her book is very insightful. Best of luck to you.

Answer 4

*cough*
Well, mainly, it's because they're not supposed to - for a 'legal war' you need UN Security Council backing- otherwise you run the risk of being noted as an agressor, and possibly end up facing the UN troops.
(they may not be that tough, but there are moral implications)

Secondly, its because it's wrong to invade a country without just cause - and the UN determines if you HAVE just cause, so any invasion without their say-so implies you could be in the wrong.

To the first replier- Iraq didn't attack America- that was an Al-quieda attack. Al-quieda are an international organisation, who were based mostly in Afghanistan (apparently)

Finally- wars go much easier if everyone's on your side. The UN is practically everyone- so if you want to win, the surefire way is to get UN approval and support.

Answer 5

Any country has the right to protect itself if it has been attacked. The President, Senate and Congress act for the American people and not the UN. The US is a sovereign nation and will make its own decisions in the best interests of its people and not the interests of the UN or anybody else.

Answer 6

The US should abide by the International Human Rights Law and UN Charter because we agreed to them when our nation co-founded the organization. We spend billions of dollars in aid to the UN, so it would cost us less to use their aid. If the UN refuses to act, we can use these basic laws to gain their approval. In addition, the National-Union agrees with their presidential candidate choosing a great communicator and analyst as Secretary of State to bridge inequalities in other nations and construct a better coalition where allies are given certain task in cooperation with the overall agenda of a mission, http://www.voteprimous.com

Answer 7

I completely agree with elf2002, her answer is correct in form and content....

Some said that US had the right to DEFEND themself, this is formely correct, but defend themself don't mean ATTACK other countries without UN consent, because US government pretended to know evidences of the existance of mass destruction weapons, and because of some pretended links between Iraq and Al-Queida( lately no MassDestructionWeapons or links were actually found and this is the reason why UN did not give its consent, because evidences were false.)

Answer 8

Every nation has the right to self-determination. It's much like with an individual in a town: If they are attacked, they don't look to the City Council for approval to defend themselves. They just do it. It's their right. If we were to attack Iran, for example, they won't seek UN approval to retaliate. They will counter-attack. It's just how things go.

Answer 9

Unilateral intervention into another sovereign country is against common norms of international law. The UN Security Council was set up to determine international threats against peace and security and to collaborate together about collective action or not. One country's unilateral action may result in a wider threat to regional or internation peace and security.

The UN Charter, signed in 1945, including the US. You can try www.un.org to see if it's on the website.

Answer 10

because the un was created for the members to vote on such issues. it is a joke really because it is too politicalthe un i mean countrys should decide on their own who they need to defend themselfs agianst not a body of countries