I thought they were going to get an eviction notice after holding their hands out for a multi billion dollar renovation of that building that should be in Iraq now.
2007-12-23 07:28:12 · 17 answers · asked by The prophet of DOOM 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Wow...well,..in ideology I guess James is a little correct...although majorly off track if he can look at the UN today or its past performance and say that the UN is anything but a failed attempt of bring about a more peaceful world.
I mean lets face it...the idea of every country no matter how small having a voice in affairs about the world is a nice idea.......
on paper.
But when you put it into practice...it doesn't work.
Even go back to as recent as the Iraq war. They all agreed on a resolution, they all threatened that "steps would be taken" if Iraq didn't comply, we had talks, we had inspectors, we were patient for over 4 years....and what did it do us ? Nothing resulted.
America had to lead the charge and give the UN back its credibility. It is nothing more than a paper tiger.
And this awkward , failing idea of an institution is a mockery of security and peace world wide.
But its here..why ? You tell me what other nation would invite officials and leaders of potentially and truthfully enemy nations to speak without harm coming to them. Without mistreatment or allowing prejudice to take hold of the proceedings ?
Only in America would such a place have the chance to work, and it still isn't working.
2007-12-23 07:44:01 · answer #1 · answered by Nightwind 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The U.N. is so slanted against the U.S.A. Much of the actions it wants to take negatively affects U.S.A. Moreover, the U.S.A. contributes the most money for its operations (all though America does often intentionally pay late as a form of protest) and the U.N. wants America to pay for everything ... even those actions which America opposes. There is so much corruption in the distribution of aid and the implementation of U.N. programs. It's outrageous and a huge waste of money (American money). Foreign diplomats ignore NY City traffic and parking laws.
I thought that it was a beautiful move when Bush made John Bolton America's ambassador to the U.N. He doesn't pull punches and openly exposed any and all of the U.N.s biased and wasteful projects. It's too bad that the dem. controlled Congress wouldn't confirm his appointment.
Having said all of this ... there are some benefits to having the U.N. in NYC. It brings an element of prestige to America and the diplomats pump a lot of money into New York's economy.
I think its a coin flip whether America should want it to stay in NYC or move it to some neutral country like Switzerland (I don't think that they want it ... the Swiss are very xenophobic).
2007-12-23 19:59:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because most members are there to try to make the world a better place. The UN was against the Iraq invasion, as was the rest of the world. Is your question more should the USA leave the UN?
a
2007-12-23 16:14:20 · answer #3 · answered by Antoni 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
...unless you live on 1st. Ave. and 42nd street in Manhattan, it's not in your "midst"... It's a great "entertainment" center for the City... and keeps New York as the Capitol of the World.
2007-12-24 04:05:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN is a liberal, socialist organization. We should completely abandon our support since we have no use for them and they usually oppose us.
EDIT: Proud to host the UN??? Maybe back in the 1050's. The UN is useless and votes against the US 75% of the time.
2007-12-23 15:37:28 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 5⤊ 3⤋
It still exists because it goes into third world countries and places that the U.S. and other countries do not want to interfere with. They should have used it on Iraq.
2007-12-23 15:46:25 · answer #6 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Mars would make an excellent location for the UN.
2007-12-23 15:33:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
The only thing the U.N. is good for is holding meetings to discuss NOTHING.
The U.N. is:
-corrupt (oil for food scandal)
-ineffective (most peacekeepers don't fight, they get captured)
-a waste of money
2007-12-23 15:37:33 · answer #8 · answered by infobrokernate 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
If you think the UN headquarters should be in Iraq, you don't understand the nature of the UN. Shouldn't we be proud of hosting such an organization. Beyond that our Vatican sized embassy should be fine.
2007-12-23 15:34:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 5⤋
Yes, I heard on Fox News that Jews were planning to turn the US into a Jewish parking lot and move the UN to China or Russia.
I wonder what will happen to Israel once the members of the UN start kissing China's bu-tt
2007-12-23 15:34:30 · answer #10 · answered by The One 2 · 5⤊ 6⤋