2007-06-19 08:20:28 · 24 answers · asked by Nickoo 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I gave everyone a thumbs-up thanks for answering.
2007-06-19 08:33:05 · update #1
Well, I was definitely leading the answerer to a certain conclusion with my question. :D
Must be my legal training showing through.
2007-06-19 09:37:48 · update #2
Unfortunately, it has. As I have grown older, with more experience and world-knowledge, it is apparent that concepts like the UN are doomed to failure.
When tyrants and dictators are given as much honor and respect as democratically elected heads of peaceful and beneficial countries, there's a problem.
Even Churchill, who, with FDR co-founded the UN, believed it would become the same sort of useless and toothless debate society that the League of Nations became, unable to even muster the courage of sending a strong letter to Mussolini for the invasion of Ethiopia. He thought that if it was able to act strongly for even 15 years, it would have done as much as it could.
After all, look at its great failures - Rwanda, Darfur, Balkans, Tibet, Iraq, etc, etc. Look at the fact that it still maintains refugee camps for "palestinians" who fled before the Arab armies in 1947. It has observation posts in Southern Lebanon which were used as screens for Hizbollah. The oil-for-food scam.
Sadly, it is living down to my expectations on so many levels, it is depressing we continue to give it so much undeserved respect.
2007-06-19 08:49:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
First of all, this is an interesting question and I'm surprised no one has starred before now. The United States has not tied the hands of the U.N. or castrated. When people live in a country ruled by a dictatorship or socialism prevails, the views are undoubtedly different. Where money is involved, people get corrupted by greed. I view the U.N. as 75% failure.
2007-06-19 15:37:36 · answer #2 · answered by kriend 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Failure
2007-06-19 15:26:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Failure. We should make all the Ambassadors that owe the city of NY in back parking tickets pay them, and then ask the UN to move to a different country.
2007-06-19 15:32:10 · answer #4 · answered by mbush40 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Miserable failure!
The corruption continues unchecked; some of the worst human rights violators are serving on the human rights commission; they've never met a despot they didn't like; and, whenever a crisis occurs that truly begs out for an independent voice of reason, the UN either makes the crisis worse or they run and hide.
2007-06-19 15:25:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
The only thing the UN has agreed on (except the US) is a Global gun ban so all of the member dictators can have unarmed populations to slaughter.. er I mean "govern"!
The pres. candidate that says (with a straight face) that They will get US out of the UN will most likely win the job!!!
2007-06-19 15:37:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Miserable failure. I like the term impotent.
2007-06-19 15:29:14 · answer #7 · answered by gone 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The entire world has come to expect miserable failure, incompetence, impotence, and corruption from the U.N.
Trick question, huh?
2007-06-19 16:28:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
What is worse than a miserable failure?
2007-06-19 15:26:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Uh, does it have to be one of those extremes?
No, it obviously hasn't put an end to war or injustice.
But it HAS done a lot of good -- the educational programs, UNICEF, the Refugee group, all of those kinds of things, it's saved lives and improved the quality of life for a LOT of people.
2007-06-19 19:59:37 · answer #10 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋