I'm curious to see if anyone else would like to see the UN disbanded. It appears to me that they are horribly corrupt, irrelevant, and a waste of money for all the nations involved. It gives a voice to rogue nations and does nothing to help provide global peace. Any thoughts?
2007-09-02
09:25:39
·
23 answers
·
asked by
Redbird
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ International Organizations
I understand that some believe that the UN helps with humanitarian issues. But they pick and choose where to aid. Look at many nations in Africa, the need is very great there and the UN is no where around. Neither is any other country really. I just think that it would benefit the world more to disband them and put the money into foreign aid. Thanks for the thoughts!
2007-09-03
14:45:17 ·
update #1
Thank you ^*#$%^#$@ American !!!
Where do I get the statistics I need for my work then ?
Who takes care of the refugee camps in Africa ?
Where do nations sit on a same neutral and balanced table ?
2007-09-03 05:29:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by NLBNLB 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
While the United Nations appears on the surface to be an irrelevant organization, one must remember that it was built in a different era and reflects the time that it was built. The UN should not be disbanded, it should be remodeled to reflect the world's current power structure. There should either be an increase in the size of the security council or current members should be taken off and replaced with countries that are gaining more power in the International Community, like India and Brazil. The UN provides a platform for smaller countries to voice opinions and if rising super powers were given more power in the UN then it would give the UN more creditability in the International community.
2007-09-03 05:08:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Beacon 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
UN is fine! it shouldn't be a world government though! What it should do is stop members attacking other counties if a resolution doesn't allow it. This would have stopped the Iraq war and their regime would have been overthrown with UN help around now when the digital age and age of wikileaks has encouraged overthrowing of authoritarian corrupt governments. Separate nations is a better solution, because you can move if you don't like the laws in your country. For examle if you don't like the fact guns are legal in america and 10 times more people die from gun crime each year than any other developed country, you can move. If you don't agree with compulsory military service you can move! Imagine if you hate a law of some kind and there is no where to move because everywhere is the same!
2016-05-19 06:30:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
We need to get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US. A League of Democratic States could be formed to provide collective security for the free countries, and it could also help with aid, but there is no reason to let third world non-entities, ingrates like France, and hostile nations like China have an impact on our country's policy decisions.
2007-09-04 07:36:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by LoneStar 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
UNO was formed with great expectations in the post WWII period. It was meant to abolish war, which it could not achieve till date.Its predecessor,
League of Nations, failed because it had no army of its ow. UN could not dream of having a UN force, because USA had always been first to send its forces.
The octopus -like hold of USA over UNO and international organs have made them all dispensable.
The 62 year-old UN needs best surgical operation not its abandonment.
UN offices be not centralized in New York but set up in each continent.
World Bank could success fully function from Switzerland. And IMF from Japan.
The permanent membershipof UNSC and veto right be abolished.
The membership of UNSC should be 1/3 UN membership, say, 63.Further, its meetings could be held in every member country.
The Un should be made accountable to the general assembly.
2007-09-05 23:30:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by The Tribune 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
What a wonderful idea!!!! Imagine if the United States didn't have to fund that organization. The U.S. pays for 90% of all the expenses and probably even more in humanitarian aid to every country in the world. It does nothing to promote world peace. It only emboldens the rogue nations and gives them a voice.
2007-09-03 15:21:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The United Nations is futile because it is being used by the United States as a pawn to achieve what it wants in the world community just like the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
2007-09-04 17:17:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the UN is vital to the world community. True, there has been corruption in the past, but name an orginization that does not have corruption, especially the US govt. I believe disbanding the UN would be great for the US if we wanted to become an isolationist nation, or an imperialist nation on a rampage to conquer and impose its' will on people. But to ignore the UN completely, as we have done for the last few years, will continue to give the US a bad name in the world and eventually we will become the new tyranny that the world is against, especially if we continue going toward the fundamentalist extremisim on the far right.
2007-09-02 11:14:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
It might be politically weak. But it does a lot of humanitarian stuff like providing countries with aid in times of war. I, for one, appreciate at least that aspect of the UN.
2007-09-03 09:34:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sam 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
better to trust devil u know than the angel u dont know. true its the one of the most corrupted body.
whats next after disbandment. create another? where will the staffing come fr? from those experienced in international relations so u recruit the same guys?!?!
keep it and improve on it. amend security counsel veto powers, give GA more teeth and laws tt members hv to comply with. sanctions to come with penalties. rogue nations to be stamped down eg sudan/darfur.
problem is everyone is still thinking of national and not universal. a new political ethos is required and it boils down to education. its a long road ahead.
2007-09-03 02:16:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Disband the UN and you're soon likely to have the WW 3 ! You're taking the issue much too easily...What I see is the impotence of the UN, which is based mainly on disinterested USA, which instead of supporting relevant solution to international problems plays solo adventures in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere...I think superpowers, like USA, former USSR and China should work together and find relevant solutions to any particular issue instead of building their strategic arsenal & playing their war games !
2007-09-03 23:22:13
·
answer #11
·
answered by javornik1270 6
·
1⤊
1⤋