Who do we continue our involvement with the United Nations & NATO?? It is high time that we got out of the U.N. and NATO, so we can focus our troops on American soil.
The U.N. especially is a huge mistake is about time we got out and told them to go find a new home for their HQ.
2007-09-15 12:13:05 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
that's ironic considering that the UN is basically a rubber stamp agency for whatever the US and Europe want to do
2007-09-15 12:22:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Actually that would be kinda difficult.
There are 37 American nations, of those only one is not a member of the UN. To get all American nations out of the UN would be impossible.
The second part though would be a lot easier as the only Americans that are usually involved in wars that do not involve their territory are the United Statesians, so we would only have to contain our own troops.
A new HQ for the UN would be a good thing, I suggest it gets moved to Brazilea.
2007-09-15 19:20:21 · answer #2 · answered by r1b1c* 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Send the UN to Switzerland. A strong, but neutral country.
The UNs response to international unless is poor at best. However, they have proved valuable in many humanitarian circumstances.
We need to keep our presence in the UN and NATO in order to maintain a US presence and watch out for what they are doing.
NATO stays in Brussels. Considering the growth of Russian hostility (how you can you trust a country whose leaders are former KGB). NATOs international unity has been put to good use in the Kosovo, etc. We need them to take our place on the European continent.
2007-09-15 19:27:12 · answer #3 · answered by SgtMoto 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You GO I agree. The UN is wothless as far as America is concerned and Nato's hands are tied so our boys get hurt without being able to defend.
Nato has to sit and watch while terriost lob missles, between houses for cover. And arent allowed to react. What UN or Nato force has accomplished their mission.
I feel sad for American soldiers who have to be assigned to these units, AMERICANS ARE WINNERS< NOT WATCHERS
2007-09-15 20:48:57 · answer #4 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The UN and NATO are two different things. I agree that the UN is an expensive pain in the butt. NATO represents a treaty agreement. Treaties with allies are good things.
2007-09-15 19:23:06 · answer #5 · answered by regerugged 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋