| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - The un-UN
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


The un-UN

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The un-UN
    Posted: 13 Sep 2016 at 08:09
The United Nations has condemned nuclear testing by North Korea and is about to issue new sanctions on the rogue state. The UN has also condemned Russia for the annexation of the Crimea and China for its claims on reefs in the South China Sea.
 So what? Big deal! 

China and North Korea have openly said that they will continue to do as they please, while Russia simply ignores the UN.

China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States, the five power brokers in the UN Security Council each have the power of veto over UN resolutions. Bearing mind that two of the five are considered, generally as behind many of the problems facing the internation community, I question why any of the five should retain the powers of veto.

What benefit does the international community gain from membership of the UN with respect to incursion by nations such as China, North Korea and Russia?

Having condemned militant, or potentially militant actions by the three, why has nothing more been done.

The three countries named have blatantly thumbed their noses at the United Nations, in fact, I wonder if the UN is worth the money and effort in the 21st Century.

Comments please.



Edited by toyomotor - 13 Sep 2016 at 08:10
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Sep 2016 at 18:09
The UN keeps people talking, and presents the possibility of a united front against an aggressor.  Russia has sanctions against it and there is some international support for Ukraine, I don't know about Georgia, but no body recognizes South Osettia except Russia.  There are costs to Russian action, which makes action less likely with the Baltic states, or so one argument would be.  North Korea has sanctions, I don't know if they are UN sanctions, but the more criticism the less chance of them being lifted soon.  There is international pressure on China, the fact that China copies everything it gets its hands on, is a minus for anyone in manufacturing interested in keeping their cultural property, the fact that that China's pollution is terrible, has costs.  Everything has costs (and probably benefits), being scolded at the UN means some people are going to say, "well, maybe I don't need to see the Great Wall, maybe I don't need to see the Hermitage."  I don't know about all the influences of the UN, but considering cost for a nation is based on GNP (or GDP?) it costs the most for the US, and the least for Niger? Chad?? South Sudan???  not sure who.  US resists Muslim proposals regarding Israel, so it is not just China or Russia that uses its veto.
Everybody else votes for the Muslim proposal, knowing that the US will veto it.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Sep 2016 at 02:59
@Franciscosan:

That's the whole point. Why should any of these countries have a veto power? Any why is the UN so slow to react to Russias aggression and Chinas South China Sea incursions. And of course, why is crazy Kim Jong Un allowed to continually threaten peace in the area?


I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Sep 2016 at 03:16
Because the victors of WWII wrote the rules, but I suspect you knew that.  And if the rules were not written that way, I suspect the victors (read Soviet Union and its 3 votes in the general assembly) would not have participated and then it wouldn't have happened.  A veto power may also have been necessary to sell it to congress, as well, especially since US has the largest bill.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Feb 2017 at 15:27
franciscoan- I respect your views.

IMHO, the UN is a defunct organisation, as far as world peace is concerned. Certainly it plays a major role in humanitarian efforts around the world, but, as demonstrated by the International Courts ruling on Japanese Whale fishing in the Southern Ocean, the South China Sea and Crimea, the UN wrings its hands, and does nothing.

NATO, rattles its sabres every now and then, moves troops into countries neighbouring Russia, and does, NOTHING.

I'm not a hawk, but I believe in the rule of fair play for everyone.

Russia should not be permitted to remain in the Crimea, China should not be permitted to annexe the South China Sea, the blood thirsty War Lords should not be permitted free license in Africa-and that includes Mugabe.

World conflicts will not change until a stand is made, and probably the Western Powers butt out of the Middle East.



Who said "All that is needed for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"? (Edmund Burke)



Edited by toyomotor - 12 Feb 2017 at 16:22
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2017 at 00:18
toyomotor, it's franciscosan (francisco-san), if you want to get it wrong, that's okay,  I'll answer to either<grin>.

I would not consider the UN in an either/or manner (defunct or not defunct).  There are things it is good at and there are things it is bad at.  There is an organization, and it works, to a certain extent.  The US, who pays the most, every once in awhile complains about not getting enough bang for their buck, but that is not the purpose of the organization.

Japan and I think, Norway and Iceland engage in 'scientific' whaling.  In the meantime, the Japanese in general are loosing the taste for whale meat, despite government promotion.  In the long run, eating whale or dolphin is on its way out.  It is only a few species of the smaller whales that the Japanese are allowed to take.

NATO is making a tripwire.  Russian aggression is not just for Crimea.  President Obama did much to look the other way.  In 2007 John McCann went to Georgia to voice his support, but of course he lost the Presidential election.  The Baltic states have to worry, but part of the problem is that these 'new' Eastern European countries have a large ethnic Russian minority, that the majority does not appreciate, and the problem feeds itself.  Putin claims to be just siding with the Russian ethnic minority, riles them up, and then supports them when they butt heads with the majority.  'if they weren't discriminated against, I would support them.'  But perhaps if he was not feeding the fire, supporting them, they wouldn't so much be discriminated against.  I agree that Ukraine's territory should be honored, but Russian eyes, it is not just a land grab but is protecting Russian ethnic minority, just like they did in Georgia (Ossetia).

Russia and China have seats on the Security Council, which makes it hard for UN effort, the Korean War was an aberration when the Russians walked out, the Americans had a vote with them not there (and Taiwan was China at the time).

When I was in college in the 1980s, people said, "oh my God! Some thing has to be done about Nuclear War and Mutually Assured Destruction!  And something was done about it, but not by the protesters wringing their hands, demanding that we do something immediately (an unilaterally).  Reagan and to a lesser extent, the first Bush engaged with communism worldwide, with the help of John Paul II, and Thatcher.  He rachetted up the cost of it, raised the stakes and called the Soviet bluff.  Because of the cost of doing so, HW Bush had to raise taxes despite a campaign promise not to, and hence he became a one term President.  Central America became a battle ground because of the fall of Nicaragua during the Carter administration to the Sandinistas and their support of insurgents in El Salvador and Guatemala.  The US engaged in rollback in little Grenada (as opposed to containment).  It was hitting a peanut with a 10 pound sledge hammer, but it woke people up that communist expansion was not going to continue on 'as usual.'  Also, the ANC was a (self-declared) communist organization, and so the administration supported the white government in South Africa, despite what many well meaning people wanted to do.  I remember, asking people arguing for divestiture in South Africa 'what about the fact that South Africa has the only industrial base in Africa?  There attitude was that 'if it was destroyed, then we would still know that we did the right thing' or some such rationalization.  Point is, we have gotten past mutually assured destruction, and it was Ronald Ray-guns that did it.  I didn't like Reagan at the time, but I have a lot of respect for him now.  Likewise we are past apartheid, and we did so without full scale civil war in South Africa.  South Africa has its problems, but full scale collapse was not one of them.

Another issue that you don't really hear about is, religious fundamentalists saying that AIDS is a curse from God.  That changed because of George W Bush treating AIDS in Africa as a health issue.  And because an evangelical such as George W Bush treated AIDS in Africa as a health issue (mainly affecting heterosexuals), that had the affect of AIDS coming to be treated as a health issue, not a moral issue, in the US.  There are however some screwy laws around AIDS that prevented (and still prevent) infectious disease measures from being used to contain aids outbreaks.  This is much the fault of AIDS and gay activists who did everything they could to suppress partner notification.

But my point is stuff is being done, problems do get solved or made moot.  Everybody feels a need to put their two cents in (rightfully or sometimes, wrongfully) the UN is good for that, and it gives the son in laws of Presidents for life a cushy job in New York<grin>.  
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2017 at 02:28
franciscosan-deepest apologies. Old eyes and an old brain, I'll do better in future.

The Japanese "scientific whaling" is only a cover, a means to get around the International Court ruling.

I understand that the Eastern European states each have Russian minority populations, to varying degrees, and the Ukraine probably one of the highest. IMHO, this is not a good enough reason for Putin to annexe the Crimea, or any part of any other neighbouring country. Russia made a mess of Georgia, and there's still fierce resistance to Russian intrusion. Of course the real reason for the Crimean annexation is to gain control over warm water ports.

I agree, some stuff does get done. But not enough. Oh well, I suppose what you can't control, you shouldn't worry about.







I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2017 at 02:53
http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/06/africa/united-nations-peacekeepers-sexual-abuse/

UN has a lot to answer for, immunity to UN workers who commit sexual assault and worse. The bureaucracy is like something out of Little Dorrit. Disgraceful and fast becoming obsolete.
 
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2017 at 03:21
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/world/africa/french-peacekeepers-un-sexual-abuse-case-central-african-republic.html?_r=0

It's still going on. Isn't the UN effort mostly to stand around without ammunition, pretending to facilitate the movements of WHO, UNICEF and other humanitarian organizations? Are they not totally defenseless themselves? Unless we are talking about children under extreme duress and hardship. Shameful.
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2017 at 13:05
Vanuatu

I agree with your two posts above.

Far too much death and suffering is taking place around the world, in circumstances where a clear, lawful and forceful intervention could prevent this from happening.

The nations of the world need to man up and act against the forces of evil which exist, and ensure that, as far as is possible, we have a better world to live in.

I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Feb 2017 at 01:30
The cure would be worse than the disease.

You get a failed state like Somalia, and because it is a failed state, other countries dump toxic waste of its coast, which kills off its fishing industry, which leads to piracy, being a failed state leads to refugees, which lead to refugee camps, which leads to despair, which leads to terrorism in neighboring Kenya.  these things are complex, so you can talk about "clear, lawful, forceful intervention,' but these things are anything but clear, often legally and morally ambiguous, and are penalizing the wrong people.

There are pressures on China and Russia, although President Trump seems to want to, unrelated to the current reasons for sanctions, further penalize China, and back off of Russia.  So quit wringing your hands, saying "we gotta do something!" and realize that people are doing something, they're just not consulting you (or me) when they do it.  You can always write your representatives and post here if you want to be more participatory.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Feb 2017 at 11:53
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

The UN keeps people talking, and presents the possibility of a united front against an aggressor.  Russia has sanctions against it and there is some international support for Ukraine, I don't know about Georgia, but no body recognizes South Osettia except Russia.  There are costs to Russian action, which makes action less likely with the Baltic states, or so one argument would be.  North Korea has sanctions, I don't know if they are UN sanctions, but the more criticism the less chance of them being lifted soon.  There is international pressure on China, the fact that China copies everything it gets its hands on, is a minus for anyone in manufacturing interested in keeping their cultural property, the fact that that China's pollution is terrible, has costs.  Everything has costs (and probably benefits), being scolded at the UN means some people are going to say, "well, maybe I don't need to see the Great Wall, maybe I don't need to see the Hermitage."  I don't know about all the influences of the UN, but considering cost for a nation is based on GNP (or GDP?) it costs the most for the US, and the least for Niger? Chad?? South Sudan???  not sure who.  US resists Muslim proposals regarding Israel, so it is not just China or Russia that uses its veto.
Everybody else votes for the Muslim proposal, knowing that the US will veto it.

It is a question of political will -and a mighty wind like blowhard Obama. You are very clear and what you say makes sense if we forget the past. No one can call an institution that functions in the way you describe useful. Commerce is the language among nations, UN is pretending to still have influence and relevance but they don't enforce sanctions and no one is telling China or Russia or US what to do. It's prime real estate, we should dissolve the UN and create a higher level ambassador in home countries. We have computers! We don't have to house and feed this post war fantasy.  

Obama’s refusal to veto anti-Israel U.N. vote ranked most anti-Semitic incident of 2016

“The most stunning 2016 U.N. attack on Israel was facilitated by President Obama when the U.S. abstained on a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel for settlement construction,” the center said. “It reversed decades-long US policy of vetoing such diplomatic moves against the Jewish State.”

Also making the list was activity by the anti-Israel Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS) movement as well as U.S. white nationalist leader Richard Spencer’s questioning whether Jews are “people or soulless golem” at a November gathering in Washington, D.C.

Two top Israeli officials have accused the Obama administration of orchestrating the resolution behind the scenes, insisting that they will provide proof to President-elect Donald Trump after he takes office in January.

Israeli Ambassador to the United States Ron Dermer said Wednesday that Israel would work to repeal the resolution 


The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Feb 2017 at 12:00
"We do gotta do something"
Examples please of all the UN is doing??

So Somalia is a failed state and that has what? to do with the UN

It behooves politicians to cloud issues with endless complications. 
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Feb 2017 at 01:03
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

"We do gotta do something"
Examples please of all the UN is doing??

So Somalia is a failed state and that has what? to do with the UN

It behooves politicians to cloud issues with endless complications. 

LOL I know the answers are elusive. It was rhetorical, you are not responsible for lighting my dim bulb. :)
The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2017 at 21:39
There just has to be a special place in the hottest corner of Hell for Woodrow Wilson (with room to the sides to squeeze in FDR and Truman) promulgating and adopting the idea of collective security.

Without the false security of the League in the 20's and 30's the great nations would have had to squarely face the looming debacle of a resurgent Germany. Once they recognized the expansionistic path Germany had adopted, they would have had to take immediate steps to end it. Something that could have been done with the greatest of ease.

The League's successor, the UN, has the unenviable record of a 70 year history where the ONLY time it has succeeded was when it failed. When the Korean War popped off, Russia boycotted the Security Council. In their absence they adopted the resolution to defend SK. Think of the irony--had the USSR only attended the meeting and vetoed the resolution, Truman would have been placed in the intolerable positon of accepting the will of the UN or publicly defying the very institution that he had lobbied for and helped to create.

I defy you to identify a single case of UN action which in its absence could/would not have been taken by individual nations or nations deciding to act in common self interest.

In 1948 the UN in its wisdom created the state of Israel. Yet when within hours of its declaration of existence they did nothing when every Arab nation in the middle east went to war. Then just as the combined armies of Islam were about to wipe the upstart new nation off the face of the earth, it saves Israel by declaring a cease fire. Now for good or evil, had they not done that there very probably would have been a 2nd Holocaust BUT the problem of Israel perpetuating a Jewish/Muslim conflict that still exits would have never arisen.

Paradoxically once that temporary cease fire lapsed and the Jews turned things around and were about to sweep all their opposition aside and establish hegemony over the region, the UN agains steps in preventing Israeli success and perpetuating the conflict. Way to go UN.

As far as the old shibboleth: at least it provides a forum to keep the parties talking and not shooting. I hate to tell you that nations have been talking with each other for millennia. Its something they know how to do. And really they're pretty good at it.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2017 at 21:44
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/06/africa/united-nations-peacekeepers-sexual-abuse/


UN has a lot to answer for, immunity to UN workers who commit sexual assault and worse. The bureaucracy is like something out of Little Dorrit. Disgraceful and fast becoming obsolete.
 


Well what do you expect from an organization where Iraq could lecture the US on voting right violations and Saudi Arabia can criticize the US onts treatment of women.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 932
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Jun 2017 at 00:46
Originally posted by AnchoriticSybarite AnchoriticSybarite wrote:

There just has to be a special place in the hottest corner of Hell for Woodrow Wilson (with room to the sides to squeeze in FDR and Truman) promulgating and adopting the idea of collective security.

Without the false security of the League in the 20's and 30's the great nations would have had to squarely face the looming debacle of a resurgent Germany. Once they recognized the expansionistic path Germany had adopted, they would have had to take immediate steps to end it. Something that could have been done with the greatest of ease.

The League's successor, the UN, has the unenviable record of a 70 year history where the ONLY time it has succeeded was when it failed. When the Korean War popped off, Russia boycotted the Security Council. In their absence they adopted the resolution to defend SK. Think of the irony--had the USSR only attended the meeting and vetoed the resolution, Truman would have been placed in the intolerable positon of accepting the will of the UN or publicly defying the very institution that he had lobbied for and helped to create.

I defy you to identify a single case of UN action which in its absence could/would not have been taken by individual nations or nations deciding to act in common self interest.

In 1948 the UN in its wisdom created the state of Israel. Yet when within hours of its declaration of existence they did nothing when every Arab nation in the middle east went to war. Then just as the combined armies of Islam were about to wipe the upstart new nation off the face of the earth, it saves Israel by declaring a cease fire. Now for good or evil, had they not done that there very probably would have been a 2nd Holocaust BUT the problem of Israel perpetuating a Jewish/Muslim conflict that still exits would have never arisen.

Paradoxically once that temporary cease fire lapsed and the Jews turned things around and were about to sweep all their opposition aside and establish hegemony over the region, the UN agains steps in preventing Israeli success and perpetuating the conflict. Way to go UN.

As far as the old shibboleth: at least it provides a forum to keep the parties talking and not shooting. I hate to tell you that nations have been talking with each other for millennia. Its something they know how to do. And really they're pretty good at it.

Wilson!! Agree, and add the disaster of the Central Banks to the list of self inflicted pain. 


Did Woodrow Wilson bitterly regret his role in creating the Federal Reserve?

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world — no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."

The root of all desires is the one desire: to come home, to be at peace. -Jean Klein
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2017 at 01:05
I think that in the United States, we don't see many of the services that the UN gives primarily in the third or fourth world (developing nations).  Are there excesses and corruption?  You betchya.  Does it sometimes serve as soapbox for dictators, and job placement for dictator's son-in-laws?  Yes.  Over all, is it worth more than it costs?  Yes.  Nobody has ever told me this, but I assume that its existence in NY was good PR for America, democracy and the American Way, during the Cold War.  We don't have to worry about small pox, and polio is almost wiped out.

There are two models of economics, one is zero sum game, if I have something, you can't have it, if you have something I can't have it.  Either/or.  The other model of economics is "all ships float at high tide."  If you increase the size of the pie, you necessarily increase the mass of each slice, even though the slices relative sizes don't change.  Increases in education and health raise the limit for all of civilization, although changes may make some things obsolete.  These are the types of things that the UN does, trying to make societies healthier and more educated.  Of course, even that is not entirely uncontroversial, Daesh doesn't want people educated, and that might just be a good reason to do it.


Edited by franciscosan - 05 Jun 2017 at 01:11
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2017 at 06:40
In the humanitarian fields, the UN does a pretty good job, but in the Peace Keeping area, particularly against organised, and perhaps nationally sponsored forces, it does very little. The fact that five founding nations have a veto vote on Security Council motions is probably the reason.

In cases like the actions of North Korea leader Kim Jung Un, and the threat he poses to the area, perhaps the Big 5 should be barred from voting.
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2017 at 14:28
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

I think that in the United States, we don't see many of the services that the UN gives primarily in the third or fourth world (developing nations).  Are there excesses and corruption?  You betchya.  Does it sometimes serve as soapbox for dictators, and job placement for dictator's son-in-laws?  Yes.  Over all, is it worth more than it costs?  Yes.  Nobody has ever told me this, but I assume that its existence in NY was good PR for America, democracy and the American Way, during the Cold War.  We don't have to worry about small pox, and polio is almost wiped out.

There are two models of economics, one is zero sum game, if I have something, you can't have it, if you have something I can't have it.  Either/or.  The other model of economics is "all ships float at high tide."  If you increase the size of the pie, you necessarily increase the mass of each slice, even though the slices relative sizes don't change.  Increases in education and health raise the limit for all of civilization, although changes may make some things obsolete.  These are the types of things that the UN does, trying to make societies healthier and more educated.  Of course, even that is not entirely uncontroversial, Daesh doesn't want people educated, and that might just be a good reason to do it.



Thank you for your analogy. Nothing could have proved my point better. The UN and its humanitarian efforts are the Clinton Foundation. Kind hearted people donate their money for "X". The Clinton Foundation (UN) takes that dollar and after salaries and expenses actually delivers 10 cents on the dollar to the target population. Had that kind hearted person simply taken the money directly to those in need instead of 1 person getter a dime; 9 or 10 people could have been helped with the same dollar.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2017 at 04:07
I am not sure what you considered my analogy, and I am not sure what point it proved, I was not trying to confirm or deny what you said.  But merely shed more light, perhaps.  The "first" world doesn't need the same services that the developing world does.  But if you have an e-bola outbreak (or SARS, etc) it is best to catch it and treat it as soon as possible.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07 Jun 2017 at 18:59
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

I am not sure what you considered my analogy, and I am not sure what point it proved, I was not trying to confirm or deny what you said.  But merely shed more light, perhaps.  The "first" world doesn't need the same services that the developing world does.  But if you have an e-bola outbreak (or SARS, etc) it is best to catch it and treat it as soon as possible.


Sorry if I misinterpreted. But my point is that the UN is part of the problem not the solution. Regardless of whether its preserving world peace or providing services to 3rd world nations.

The first world decides to tackle a problem in the 3rd world and scrounges up a dollar to fix it. It gives it to the UN and with overhead graft and corruption the end user receives a dime. If instead the US or whatever 1st world nation decides to tackle the problem, I guarantee that the intended recipients would be getting close to .95 or higher.

As far as preserving the peace tell me where the UN has done anything that could not have been done by individual nation(s) acting on their own.

I've already cited Israel. Had there been no UN there would be no Arab/Israeli festering sore for the past 70 yrs. Had they not issued the first cease fire, there would have been a 2nd genocide and no state of Israel today. Bad for the Jews who would have been murdered; good for stability and world peace. No Al-Quaida, no Hamas, no Isis nor any of the other myriad terrorist orgs.

How well has the UN worked in preserving the peace following the breakup of Yugoslavia, or the breakup of the USSR. How well has it protected the Ukraine from the invasion of Crimea and the continuing assault on its territorial integrity by Russia. How would the Tibetans rate the effectiveness of the UN.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2017 at 00:51
We could go for "the first world deciding to tackle a problem in the 3rd world," and deciding to do it directly.  That would be called colonialism.  As it is, being the first world being involved in the third world is labeled as neocolonialism, unless you get sovereign governments to "buy into the endeavor," the price of that buy-in, is "esteeming the rightfully elected leaders," the presidents for life. and the corruption that occurs as the price of doing business in their nations.

I see, as far as Israel is concerned, you want a solution!  And if that is a Final Solution, so be it?  I modestly propose a solution greater than that, kill of humanity and let the Earth revert back to nature.  No more human problems.  No, I am not always happy with what the UN does, but I see a value and a virtue to the effort.  As far as Israel is concerned today, I suggest you deal with the realities of the situation instead of wishful thinking about what exterminations "should" have been done in... 1947-48?
As far as where the course of Israel was settled, I would suggest look at the Balfour agreement, and the rise of a particular kind of nationalism, known as Zionism.  However, if it was not for another form of nationalism, National Socialism, there would not have been such a pressing need for Israel, nor a sympathy with it amongst the great powers.  It is ironic that Zionism and its Ur-nemesis, German ultra-nationalism come from the same place, Vienna in the 1890s.  Of course the ideas about ethnic self-determination were a bane to the low simmer of the melting pot of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2017 at 20:22
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

We could go for "the first world deciding to tackle a problem in the 3rd world," and deciding to do it directly.  That would be called colonialism.  As it is, being the first world being involved in the third world is labeled as neocolonialism, unless you get sovereign governments to "buy into the endeavor," the price of that buy-in, is "esteeming the rightfully elected leaders," the presidents for life. and the corruption that occurs as the price of doing business in their nations.

I see, as far as Israel is concerned, you want a solution!  And if that is a Final Solution, so be it?  I modestly propose a solution greater than that, kill of humanity and let the Earth revert back to nature.  No more human problems.  No, I am not always happy with what the UN does, but I see a value and a virtue to the effort.  As far as Israel is concerned today, I suggest you deal with the realities of the situation instead of wishful thinking about what exterminations "should" have been done in... 1947-48?
As far as where the course of Israel was settled, I would suggest look at the Balfour agreement, and the rise of a particular kind of nationalism, known as Zionism.  However, if it was not for another form of nationalism, National Socialism, there would not have been such a pressing need for Israel, nor a sympathy with it amongst the great powers.  It is ironic that Zionism and its Ur-nemesis, German ultra-nationalism come from the same place, Vienna in the 1890s.  Of course the ideas about ethnic self-determination were a bane to the low simmer of the melting pot of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire.


What a strange definition of colonialism. Seems to me that during the 17, 18, & early 1900s when one of the European powers wanted a particular piece of real estate they took it and if the natives...oops sorry indigenous people didn't like it they killed them--just ask Montezuma, Powhattan, Cetshwayo or any number of the Indian nabobs. And the goal was not to solve a problem in the conquered area, the goal was to enrich the conquerer. Now I admit I wear glasses so my eyesight is not the best, but I really fail to see the distinction between a first world country deciding to "fix a problem" and the UN deciding to do the same thing. As a practical matter, any fixing to be done will be done by 1st world nations regardless as to whether Andorra, Fiji and Belize vote their support or not. According to YOUR definition "buying into the endeavor" does not solve the problem, it perpetuates it.

I seriously doubt that anyone is more pro-Israeli than I am. Had I been their PM, I would have probably used there nukes at least a half a dozen times in the past 50 yrs. However regardless of how cruel and heartless it seems, I could have lived with a 2nd final solution. The world has endured a plethora of genocides--Armenia, Hitler, Cambodia, Kosovo, the entire continent of Africa post WWII--and the world lumbers on.

Israel almost from its inception has been a flash point which could have easily led to a nuclear exchange several times. But even more importantly it precipitated the rise of radical Islam. There is not a single inhabited square foot on the planet earth where you can be 100% sure of your personal safety viz a viz a terrorist attack.

I'm glad you brought up Zionism and Nazism. What is so "particular" about Zionism? In a world not a country mind you but a world where anti Semitism was not only accepted but the norm, you find it strange that Jews might find it appealing to have a homeland where they would not be persecuted. We point our fingers at Germany and condemn. Do you remember the rampant anti=Semitism of la belle France and Dreyfuss. How many Jews did Great Britain allow to immigrate when Hitler wanted not to kill but to expel them from Germany. Spain expelled the Jews 400 years ago under threat of death or compelled conversion. How welcome were the Jews to the US. Not. Just a few decades before my birth my home state of Georgia was home to one of the most horrific crimes involving anti-Semitism in history. A Jewish businessman was falsely accused and convicted of rape. The sitting governor at the time, one of the most popular and powerful men ever to hold that post; destroyed his political career by commuting the sentence from death. A mob broke into the jail and gleefully lynched him.

As for German ultra nationalism, without the first UN (the League) there would have been no Hitler. Dear Adolph would have been just another name on a census roll no different than Hans, Fritz or Ulrich.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jun 2017 at 03:16
I am not saying that there was anything "particular" about Zionism.  I'm saying that it was in the air at the time, in Austria, it is almost like two sides of the same coin, German ultra-nationalism on the one hand, and Zionism on the other, but coming out of Vienna in the !890s.  And of course you have on top of that Wilson arguing for self-determination for ethnic peoples after WWI.  In my mind, it is not very far from that that Hitler starts coming up with Lebensraum, and Albeit macht Frei.  Ho Chi Minh was at Versailles, that is where Vietnamese nationalism came from, wrapped in communist coat.
No, Zionism is _an_ answer for, something there shouldn't need to be an answer for, the holocaust/ Shoah.  I worry that Judaism is putting all its eggs in one basket.  Of course, up until fairly recently, there were more Jews in the United States than there was in Israel.  And some Orthodox Jews both inside and outside of Israel consider Israel to be a pretender, for the Messiah is to found Israel, and where is the Messiah?  It is not a personal problem for me, religions can be inconsistent about small details.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 Jun 2017 at 02:57
franciscosan

Do you think it's time for a new model UN?

If you do, what model would you suggest?
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2017 at 00:15
I don't see why the Security Council would want to add members such as Germany, Japan, Brazil or India to the Security Council.  The five have power of veto and I don't see why they would give that up, or share that further.  Some complain that the UN can't get anything done because of the veto, but that kind of an attitude presupposes that action is good, and inaction bad.  Is the US Congress more efficient when it passes more bills in a year than in the last year?  The question is not whether one should do things, but whether one is doing things that should get done.
Back to Top
AnchoriticSybarite View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 14 May 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AnchoriticSybarite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 Jun 2017 at 07:17
I am 5'6" and weigh 260 lbs. I want to eat a pound of French fries with every meal with a bucket of friend chicken followed by an entire pound cake and a gallon of ice cream. While doing so I want to lose 100 lbs. Does anyone see an inherent problem?

There is no workable model for ANY UN. Nationalism and a functioning "world government" are 2 antithetical propositions. The great powers do what is in their own best interests unless it runs counter to that of another great power. Bolivia, Bhutan, Rhodesia and all the other non-great nations do as they are told. This statement may be distasteful/unpalatable but it is historically accurate.

Did the UN stop/prevent Korea or Vietnam. Did it stop the Russian invasion of Afghanistan or for that matter the US invasion. What about any of the Israeli/Arab set tos. What about the USSR's invasions of Czechslovakia and Hungary? In the post Soviet area has the UN prevented any of the reconquistas by Russia. Is the Crimea currently in Ukrainian hands. Does Ukrainian sovereignty extend to its own eastern half.

If you believe UN sanctions are going to remedy the situation there, do I have some prime beachfront property in Arizona for you ---CHEAP. Do you really believe that anything short of military intervention will provide results. And no matter how much the US, EU, NATO or the UN huffs or puffs do you think you'll see one soldier being sent in harms way.

That is the problem with the whole concept of a UN, it provides the public with a false sense of security. When that building in NY went up John Q Public signed a great sigh of relief that now he didn't have to worry about nations doing bad things to each other.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 2117
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17 Jun 2017 at 20:57
Did the UN stop Finland from invading Norway?  Finland did not invade Norway.  See!  The UN must have stopped it.  How about Australia invading Malaysia?  UN must have stopped that too.  If you fault the UN for not stopping invasions that it really had nothing to do with (either way), then you probably should give them credit/blame for not starting invasions that never happened.

So Rhodesia does what its told?  Really? you mean Mugabe's Zimbabwe where white farmers were forced off their efficient modern farms, and the farms were given to black cronies, despite what Great Britain (security council member) and the rest of the world wanted?

Think of the UN as a slush fund, slush funds are useful for delegating resources to things that come up, that are not necessarily budgeted for.  Like, ebola, or sars, or subsistence farmers deforesting the Amazon.  The United States probably doesn't have troops in Cyprus keeping the ethnic Turks and ethnic Greeks separate, but somebody has to do it.  Or maybe there are American soldiers there along with the Swedes and the Poles and Costa Ricans and it is light duty.  Of course, the United States pays the most to this slush fund, resents that and complains about not getting its own way.  On the other hand, the United States is probably consulted for just about any and every problem that comes down the pike, and that is worth something.  
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 3765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18 Jun 2017 at 04:27
When did Australia invade, or attempt to invade Malysia? 
And why is this even relevant to this conversation.

If you're referring to what is called  Konfrontasi
Quote Between 1962 and 1966 Indonesia and Malaysia fought a small, undeclared war which came to involve troops from Australia, New Zealand, and Britain. The conflict resulted from Indonesia's President Sukarno's belief that the creation of the Federation of Malaysia, which became official in September 1963, represented a British attempt to maintain colonial rule behind the cloak of independence granted to its former colonial possessions in south-east Asia.

For the full story see the link below. 

https://www.awm.gov.au/articles/event/indonesian-confrontation

Once again you go off the rails simply to have a go at me, and once again you're wrong.


And where did I mention Mugabe and Zimbabwe? The man has broiught that country to it's knees, I agree. But, I didn't mention him at all.

Nor did I mention the Scandinavian conflicys which have their roots in history.

Your reference to the UN as a "slush fund" vastly oversimplifys the matter. I asked you if you believed that it was time for the UN to be overhauled, and if so, what model you would recomend, but obviously that was too hard for you.


If you can't answer the question, just say so.





Edited by toyomotor - 18 Jun 2017 at 04:30
I often wonder why I try.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.