Whats the point of the UN....useless again!

#1
I know there is a Myanmar thread, a Balkans thread, a Syria thread and a North Korea thread.

But surely it is long overdue an overhaul of the ineffective dis-United Nations.

What exactly is this expense achieving?

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41420973

Veto's to massage the ego of 'super' powers or their wannabe ilk.

Africa is a melting pot of violence that has laughed at the UN for decades. The Middle East is a melting pot of violence.

What is the UN mandate and is it worth a damn anymore?

Thoughts on a postcard......
 
#3
Fair point.
U.N is a toothless tiger.
It allows out of touch burocrats, and overpaid narcisstic useless pen pushers, a forum to spout platitudes, and shed crocodile tears, while the worlds politicians, clergy, and bankers instigate wars, famines, and civil unrest, so that the political military complex can fund and supply arms dealers with the wherewithal to prolong the agony of the worlds faceless masses, while drawing massive salaries and perks, paid for by the hard taxed populace of the warring countries. End of rant!!
 
#4
This is terrible. You mean that lessons were not learned from the League of Nations?

Surely the UN is there to provide employment for the useless and to make failing/mediocre thespians and the like feel important.

Perhaps we should hold a referendum on leaving it. I am sure that we pay our dues unlike.......you know who.
 
#8
This is terrible. You mean that lessons were not learned from the League of Nations?

Surely the UN is there to provide employment for the useless and to make failing/mediocre thespians and the like feel important.

Perhaps we should hold a referendum on leaving it. I am sure that we pay our dues unlike.......you know who.
The subject matter is to serious for sarcasm, but I take your point, and totally agree, the farce that is the UN has gone on for far to long, it has had a modicum of success in that it reacts eventually to humanitarian disasters, and puts boots and logistics where needed, but they are sent to disasters that are initially started by the UN's lack of force to mediate between the warring factions, and holding governments to account on a foreseeable famine scenario. the bottom line is, as I see it, too many people, not enough resources, and total world power in the hands of incompetent bias idiots.
 
#9
It allows out of touch burocrats, and overpaid narcisstic useless pen pushers, a forum to spout platitudes, and shed crocodile tears, while the worlds politicians, clergy, and bankers instigate wars, famines, and civil unrest, so that the political military complex can fund and supply arms dealers with the wherewithal to prolong the agony of the worlds faceless masses, while drawing massive salaries and perks, paid for by the hard taxed populace of the warring countries. End of rant!!
That sounds more like a true assessment than a rant.
 
#12
The subject matter is to serious for sarcasm, but I take your point, and totally agree, the farce that is the UN has gone on for far to long, it has had a modicum of success in that it reacts eventually to humanitarian disasters, and puts boots and logistics where needed, but they are sent to disasters that are initially started by the UN's lack of force to mediate between the warring factions, and holding governments to account on a foreseeable famine scenario. the bottom line is, as I see it, too many people, not enough resources, and total world power in the hands of incompetent bias idiots.

It is a serious subject, but do you see change on the horizon? Or is everyone involved happy with the way that things are.
 
#14
Somebody will probably be along shortly to say that without the UN things would be even worse, just like with the EU.
The more burocratic departments and government agencies that evolve to rectify a problem, the more convoluted the problem becomes, too many people, some with their own agendas, trying to solve a problem that has escalated out of proportion to the original problem that warranted their intervention in the first place, its a catch 22 situation, simply by their being there, they prolong the agony, nobody wins, least of all the women and kids, who whatever the massive problem, are always at the bottom of the equation.
 
#17
P.S. Aren't the septic's 1.2 Trillion in dept.,? I cannot see them paying any time soon.
They pay, but they're in arrears and they pay to host it etc. If they do default, there's always Article 19:
Chapter IV
Article 19
A Member of the United Nations which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions to the Organization shall have no vote in the General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The General Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a Member to vote if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the Member.
The whole thing needs a shake up. Takes years to make decisions (like the proverbial mating elephants), can't act quickly. Doesn't give troops robust ROEs. Can't act against any members vested interest eg Syria three confirmed uses of CW by the UN appointed OPCW and JIM, always a Russian veto. Same with the US on Israel (more often than not). Permanent members refusing to give up their vetoes on HR violations. It goes on.

BLUF: It needs a massive shake up. The principles are fine, it's how they go about them.
 
#18
I know there is a Myanmar thread, a Balkans thread, a Syria thread and a North Korea thread.

But surely it is long overdue an overhaul of the ineffective dis-United Nations.

What exactly is this expense achieving?

www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41420973

Veto's to massage the ego of 'super' powers or their wannabe ilk.

Africa is a melting pot of violence that has laughed at the UN for decades. The Middle East is a melting pot of violence.

What is the UN mandate and is it worth a damn anymore?

Thoughts on a postcard......
What would you like the UN to do? How do you propose to change the UN? And will you complain when the newly refurbished and effective UN does something that inconveniences the UK?
 
#19
This is terrible. You mean that lessons were not learned from the League of Nations?

Surely the UN is there to provide employment for the useless and to make failing/mediocre thespians and the like feel important.

Perhaps we should hold a referendum on leaving it. I am sure that we pay our dues unlike.......you know who.
Hence why Gordon Brown got a job with them.

That, alone, gives good reason to disband the whole thing.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Blogg The Intelligence Cell 8
1stgulfmac The NAAFI Bar 24
S The Other Half 20

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top