Do You think the UN is Dead after the United States invaded Iraq?

arabie · #1 03-02-2005, 01:22 PM

Were they always dead? Did they ever have an important role? How did the iraq war change the UN's role?

DISCUSS.... i'll add my opinions throughout the thread

jaxmike · #2 03-02-2005, 01:24 PM

the UN has been a joke for years. their total and complete corruption is what sealed their fate, not the fact that the US ignores them. the US is soverign, we do not answer to the UN, they, and the rest of the world, need to understand that.

arabie · #3 03-02-2005, 01:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the US is soverign, we do not answer to the UN, they, and the rest of the world, need to understand that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, however, how can an international governing body ever exist then, corruption or not?

jaxmike · #4 03-02-2005, 01:44 PM

the point is that its not a "governing body" because it has no authority.

xadrez · #5 03-02-2005, 02:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the UN has been a joke for years. their total and complete corruption is what sealed their fate, not the fact that the US ignores them. the US is soverign, we do not answer to the UN, they, and the rest of the world, need to understand that.

[/ QUOTE ]

The US is indeed sovereign, as is every other country in the UN. The sovereignty of nations is not something the UN ever agreed to contest or override. This is pretty explicitly stated in the charter. FYI

jaxmike · #6 03-02-2005, 03:40 PM

understood, but many in the liberal camp advocate defferring to the UN to make major decisions. this is idiotic.

Dead · #7 03-02-2005, 04:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
understood, but many in the liberal camp advocate defferring to the UN to make major decisions. this is idiotic.

[/ QUOTE ]

And many in the conservative camp advocate racism and eating out of Limbaugh's butt. Hyperbole? Sure. Not very different from your post.

What liberal said that they want the UN to make major decisions for us? What liberal said that they want the UN to make decisions about our health care, education, and military?

Come back when you can post a real argument instead of crap that you heard on Fox News.

Warchant88 · #8 03-02-2005, 04:35 PM

It amazes me when people slam Fox News, without actually watching it. I know a lot of people who say that they can't watch the "garbage" of Fox News. And they don't watch it, yet they say that it is horrible. How can you hate something without being familiar with it.

This is not in defense of Fox News, btw. Some of the stuff the say is very dumb. However, they are conservative on the OPINIONATED shows. We all know there are other channels out there that fling biased news on "unbiased" shows.

jaxmike · #9 03-02-2005, 05:24 PM

how do you figure racism? its the democratic party that PRACTICES racism.

just about every major liberal politician did not want us to act in iraq with getting authorization, yet they voted for it anyway.

you have been brainwashed by the press. i suggest you watch more fox news. they are at least fair in their reporting. they dont fabricate stories like the NYT has been known to do.

Cyrus · #10 03-03-2005, 04:36 AM

1. Every world power has always used international organisations to promote its interests.

2. The United Nations is an international organisation, ostensibly set up to promote peace, world diplomacy, establishment of rules governing relations between countries (and enforcement of such rules), the end of colonialism, and other such good deeds. However, such objectives, more often than not, run smack against the interests od world powers!

3. The UN's actions are dictated by the Security Council. The Permanent Members of the SC have veto power.

4. The UN succeeds and fails in its missions precisely as its SC succeeds and fails in 'em. As the SC Members go, so does the SC. And so does the United Nations. (General Assembly decisions make for excellent wall paper!)

5. There has been no case, historically, so far, whereby a world power suffered in a matter of its national security as a result of a decision (or, heaven forbid, action) taken by the United Nations. And that goes particularly so for the United States!

6. The UN has been used by the United States a lot of times, in order to steer policy towards American interests (not related to national security but, rather, to economic interests).

7. The United States has ignored, sabotaged or acted against United Nations decisions many time in the past, without having been "punished" for it, at all. (This includes decisions taken by organisations associated with the UN, eg UNESCO.)

8. The United States now stands heads and shoulders (and then some) above the other countries of this planet. It is to be expected that the US no longer feels the need for such "anachronistic" set-ups as the United Nations and is looking for alternatives, eg "coalitions of the willing", "the camp of democracies", etc. In other words, the US is looking for a "legitimate" way to form a world organisation set up "among equals" whereby it will be more equal than the others.

But

9. Trying to set up a world organisation (which will include the United States) on the basis of rules and, at the same time, establishing that the United States will not be binded by those rules, is a self-defeating enterprise.