Has the UN lost its way....

silverfox

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6508909.stm

You might have thought that as the CORNWALL boarding team were operating under a direct mandate from the UN, that they might have been entitled to something a little more stronger in support from that august body. Instead all that issued is a 'watered down' statement expressing concern. Good job they're not really angry then otherwise who knows what they might have done.... on to the naughty step you go Iran...

So who in the UNSCR might have put a spanner in the diplomatic works... surely not Russia perhaps?? I mean they can't be harbouring a grudge over the little incident when 4 of their policemen were taken captive in Georgia and when they came to the UNSCR for a similar resolution, got flanned by....guess who.... yes - the US and the UK. What goes around comes around it would seem....
 

Jack77

War Hero
The UN is a waste of space. Just ask the Rwandans, Bosnians or any other place they have infected with their self righteous bullshit and ineffectiveness. You can rekly on them for a lot of talk and hand wringing, but when it comes to firm action your local Brownie troop would be a more effective option.
 
I think this initial watering down is precisely for the reasons you provided. I do also think however that given time we will get what we want from the UN. A lot of current UNSC members (and not just Russia) do not want to appear in the Midddle East to be a mere rubber stamp for the US & UK.
 

F169

War Hero
Jack77 - totally agree. It is amazing the USA are still in it. The UN certainly reflects the nations it serves - including the large number which are self-serving, undemocratic and corrupt.

IRAN so far has shown the UN exactly what it deserves - total contempt. Leaders like Gaddafi, Milosevic, Hussein etc. only understand and react to one thing - brute force, - which needn't always be ignorant........
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
The UN exists to give tin pot dictators of 3rd world dumps a venue were they can appear relavent and slag us off… other than that, it's about as much use as tits on a bull.
 
F169 said:
Jack77 - totally agree. It is amazing the USA are still in it. The UN certainly reflects the nations it serves - including the large number which are self-serving, undemocratic and corrupt.

IRAN so far has shown the UN exactly what it deserves - total contempt. Leaders like Gaddafi, Milosevic, Hussein etc. only understand and react to one thing - brute force, - which needn't always be ignorant........

Agree 100% - UN is currently a complete joke. EU does not appear to be any more effective either.
 

greenking

Banned
Well before we all go and write the UN off, just take a moment to examine the alternative........which is? Anyone remember the League of Nations? Apart from the B Movie sounding name, they were the forerunner to the UN and even worse.

As for tinpot dictators only understanding brute force, that may be true. Unfortunately the nation states which 'support and back' them do not. The UN may be considered a glorified talking shop, but diplomacy is always the right way to resolve things, if a little slow.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick".

The other thing worth remembering is who funds the UN? I may be mistaken, but I don't think the USA has paid its "dues" in full to the UN for some time and yet remains the most important player - something not right there.......

GK
 

F169

War Hero
Greenking, you ask what is the alternative. Simple. What existed before the League and the UN: Individual nation states exercising diplomacy in their own right and in conjunction with other like minded states.

It doesn't need the United Nations - unlike the claims of the EU in Europe (which I would dispute) the UN hasn't maintained world peace or anything like it since it came into existence. Scrap it, and some of those dictators, will soon follow.
 

greenking

Banned
Simple usually means naive (no offence intended). The UN may be inefficient and cumbersome but it is the best answer available to global issues. Remember there is a lot more to the UN than the Security Council (I would, for example, take huge issue with who gets to be Permanent Members).

Nation states pursuing their own agendas? Global resources becoming more scarce? More war not less............

GK
 

F169

War Hero
Greenking, sorry we will not agree on this, anyone who believes the future to solving the issues of the world lies in the UN is being incredibly naive from my perspective.

China, Russia, Brazil, India, the USA, France will always follow their own star when push comes to shove. There is some hope that regional bodies like the EU, OAU, ASEAN etc may exercise some influence but I wouldn't bet on it.
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
greenking said:
Simple usually means naive (no offense intended). The UN may be inefficient and cumbersome but it is the best answer available to global issues. Remember there is a lot more to the UN than the Security Council (I would, for example, take huge issue with who gets to be Permanent Members).

Nation states pursuing their own agendas? Global resources becoming more scarce? More war not less............

GK


Oh yeah? How many bombers does the UN have… ah yes, they ring up us nasty 'Imperialists' when they need to enforce their Resolutions at gunpoint.


We need to stop dicking about with this UN crap and set up an 'Anglosphere' - USA, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. When the sh1t hits the fan they are the only countries we can rely on.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top