• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the UN a joke?

blackjack50

blackjack50

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
26,629
Reaction score
6,661
Location
Florida
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
I feel that the UN is an idealist joke with so much ridiculous banter that it is hard to see the good that they actually do.

I understand that some things they do are wonderful, but I think a lot of the data that they collect is a joke. I also think that they are garbage in terms of actually stopping problems too now that everyone understands the game (you know when the UN shows up...shut up and wait till they leave).

Ugh. Stupid computer I tried to put in the poll and I guess I added it in wrong.
 
Last edited:
"The United States should get out of the United Nations, and our highest national priority is enforcing U.N. resolutions against Iraq."
 
stonewall50 said:
I feel that the UN is an idealist joke with so much ridiculous banter that it is hard to see the good that they actually do.

I understand that some things they do are wonderful, but I think a lot of the data that they collect is a joke. I also think that they are garbage in terms of actually stopping problems too now that everyone understands the game (you know when the UN shows up...shut up and wait till they leave).

Ugh. Stupid computer I tried to put in the poll and I guess I added it in wrong.
Click to expand...
The three biggest problems with the U.N. are politics, corruption and consensus. The politics side comes from needing to do something and trying to not piss other members off while getting it done, this pretty much leads to half assed attempts at doing something that ultimately become a joke. Consensus then comes into the picture and since it's a global membership there are major cultural and political disagreements further mucking up the politics meaning once something finally does get passed the "resolution" resolves nothing and the action is lacking. Then there is the corruption, just going off the top of my head there was "oil for food", and humanitarian funds that disappeared IIRC in the brief history of the body.

Personally I think it's a waste of money and time and pretty much useless as a political body. Add to that they have a tendancy to not respect national sovereignity which is a very troubling stance.
 
No the UN as a whole body is not a joke.
But one part of the UN that is a joke is the UNSC... Now thats a joke.
 
To be blunt, its not wise to judge any organization based only on its shortfalls or failures. The entire picture should be seen, and then an intelligent discussion as to the UNs pluses and minuses...And, in truth, the UN has been a success.
WW3 has not occurred, quite a feat and to the dismay of many..
Generally, man does not want peace.
 
Is the UN a joke?
Click to expand...

I believe you will find the answer in my signature. :)
 
The UN is an organization the founders never would have allowed us to join. It ties us to an organization with no benefit to our country. What does the UN do for us is the better question.
 
stonewall50 said:
I feel that the UN is an idealist joke with so much ridiculous banter that it is hard to see the good that they actually do.

I understand that some things they do are wonderful, but I think a lot of the data that they collect is a joke. I also think that they are garbage in terms of actually stopping problems too now that everyone understands the game (you know when the UN shows up...shut up and wait till they leave).

Ugh. Stupid computer I tried to put in the poll and I guess I added it in wrong.
Click to expand...

The UN is only as effective as the powers its member countries are willing to vest it with. Which is not very much. Since countries are by nature reluctant to surrender even a tiny bit of sovereignty in most cases, it's unsurprising that the UN can't accomplish many of the things it wants to do.
 
MarineTpartier said:
The UN is an organization the founders never would have allowed us to join. Now, how in the world do you know this ?? It ties us to an organization with no benefit to our country. What does the UN do for us is the better question.
Click to expand...
Why should the UN "benefit" our nation ?
Why should our nation be run by men (and their ideas) dead 300 years ago ?
Have you noticed, the world has changed...
 
earthworm said:
Why should the UN "benefit" our nation ?
Why should our nation be run by men (and their ideas) dead 300 years ago ?
Have you noticed, the world has changed...
Click to expand...

You avoid the question. What does the UN do for us? Do you make it a habit to enter into agreements with people that don't benefit you, in some way? The world has changed, men don't.
 
The UN, like ANY treaty organization, is only as important as its members will give it importance. How much importance do its members find in creating resolutions, and how much importance to they find in enforcing them are what defines the importance of the UN. That being said, the UN can be extremely important in many situations and extremely irrelevant in others but you cannot simply declare the entire thing as a whole important or unimportant.

For example the Gulf War was an action under the authority of the UN, and the member nations of the UN as well as the member nations of the coalition gave the UN high importance in that regard and didn't move until it gave its go ahead.

But in the Iraq War of 2003, the United States and other allies gave the UN little importance(although they did try) and thus in the end the United Nations had little to say and no power over the actions of the members of the coalition during that war.
 
We have an obligtion to make it work!
 
Evil is never a joke.
 
StillBallin75 said:
The UN is only as effective as the powers its member countries are willing to vest it with. Which is not very much. Since countries are by nature reluctant to surrender even a tiny bit of sovereignty in most cases, it's unsurprising that the UN can't accomplish many of the things it wants to do.
Click to expand...

The bolded is a good thing. :)
 
LaMidRighter said:
Same premise, even less power and a miserable failure that makes even the U.N. seem workable.
Click to expand...

failure because the US did no participate and the powers that remained allowed that Japenese Empire and the Nazis mock the system. It seems that lesson is lost on many of you.
 
Higgins86 said:
failure because the US did no participate and the powers that remained allowed that Japenese Empire and the Nazis mock the system. It seems that lesson is lost on many of you.
Click to expand...
We participate in the U.N. and dictatorships along with Juntas and other unstable governments still mock it. The biggest problem with the U.N. is that they care more about the laws of member nations than actually getting problems taken care of. World gun control is a bigger issue to the U.N. than getting past the political handicap that keeps NATO forces from properly engaging hostiles.
 
LaMidRighter said:
We participate in the U.N. and dictatorships along with Juntas and other unstable governments still mock it. The biggest problem with the U.N. is that they care more about the laws of member nations than actually getting problems taken care of. World gun control is a bigger issue to the U.N. than getting past the political handicap that keeps NATO forces from properly engaging hostiles.
Click to expand...


since the formation of the UN mass global conflict has been avoided, many dicators have fallen thanks to UN actions and relative stability has been sustainted. Of course the UN has its faults and Ruwanda and Dafur can testify that but joint efforts like in the balklands makes the UN worth while. More work has to be done but so far its doing its job.
 
Higgins86 said:
since the formation of the UN mass global conflict has been avoided, many dicators have fallen thanks to UN actions and relative stability has been sustainted. Of course the UN has its faults and Ruwanda and Dafur can testify that but joint efforts like in the balklands makes the UN worth while. More work has to be done but so far its doing its job.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree. The U.N. was basically helpless when Saddam Hussein threw out their weapons inspectors, their relief efforts in Africa were useless(I do agree with that), many of the toppled dictators held power for decades under U.N. scrutiny. As well the U.N. tends to pick sides on politics using one sided and half finished data, it does not respect national sovereignity which is a problem.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I completely disagree. The U.N. was basically helpless when Saddam Hussein threw out their weapons inspectors, their relief efforts in Africa were useless(I do agree with that), many of the toppled dictators held power for decades under U.N. scrutiny. As well the U.N. tends to pick sides on politics using one sided and half finished data, it does not respect national sovereignity which is a problem.
Click to expand...

Saddam threw out the bomb inspectors and broke the rules during the 90's and what did we do, we bombed them aka desert fox 1998
 
Higgins86 said:
Saddam threw out the bomb inspectors and broke the rules during the 90's and what did we do, we bombed them aka desert fox 1998
Click to expand...
This is true, we bombed them in a pretty half-assed attempt to rattle a few cages. I have revised some of my criticisms of Clinton over the years since we have had some pretty messed up leadership lately, but his choices of action were pretty lousy when it came to use of force.
 
LaMidRighter said:
This is true, we bombed them in a pretty half-assed attempt to rattle a few cages. I have revised some of my criticisms of Clinton over the years since we have had some pretty messed up leadership lately, but his choices of action were pretty lousy when it came to use of force.
Click to expand...

did the job though and of course the rest is history. I dont disagree with you that the UN has to take a more agressive stance on certain conflicts ( syria right now) but I dont think that the west would benefit from getting of of the UN. In many pleaces the UN act as a silent but visable force and I know a few lads that had to serve in the UN and let me tell you I have a lot of respect for those guys who have to stand their and take **** and can't fire back because that takes balls. No one country is responisble enought to take on global issues alone, we need each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom