If you expected new permanent seats, you're out of luck.
I'm shocked Mexico made it. I was expecting, say, another Brazilian term or Argentinan.
Thoughts?
New members to the Security Council.
If you expected new permanent seats, you're out of luck.
I'm shocked Mexico made it. I was expecting, say, another Brazilian term or Argentinan.
Thoughts?
HOW ABOUT 'DEM VIKINGS
-Martok
Re: New members to the Security Council.
It's completely useless anyways, so I can't say I mind too much either way.
Re: New members to the Security Council.
Uganda?!
CR
Ja Mata, Tosa.
The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement! - William Pitt the Elder
Re: New members to the Security Council.
I say we shift the permanent seats/vetos to:
Monaco, Lichtenstein, San Marino, Fiji, & the Vatican.
Then reduce all of the others to observer status.
Things would get sorted out in no time.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Re: New members to the Security Council.
Does anyone here actually support expanding the Permanent Seats?
I think countries like Germany, and Japan, both economic and military powers should have a permnent seat.
Meh, I haven't enjoyed the League of Nations, aka the U.N., in a long time.
HOW ABOUT 'DEM VIKINGS
-Martok
Re: New members to the Security Council.
Unfortunately, what the people want is irrelevant.Originally Posted by SwedishFish
Rest in Peace TosaInu, the Org will be your legacy
Re: New members to the Security Council.
I sure do. Make the veto power rotating, and a 2/3 majority to get stuff passed along with a couple new members. Germany and Japan are both fine choices. South Korea would be good also.
Re : New members to the Security Council.
Completely useless this. They ought to limit membership to just the five permanent members. The other states can then plead and grovel with the permanent member in whose sphere of influence they reside to see to their interests.
Re: Re : New members to the Security Council.
I think the security council needs to be expanded and the permentent members powers curtailed. Right now its a joke when less then 10% of earth's countries have a voice in the U.N. Not to mention that Veto means no slightly conterversial issue gets resolved.
When it occurs to a man that nature does not regard him as important and that she feels she would not maim the universe by disposing of him, he at first wishes to throw bricks at the temple, and he hates deeply the fact that there are no bricks and no temples
-Stephen Crane
Re: New members to the Security Council.
Yes, yet another excellent opportunity for the U.S. to pull out of a dated non relevant institution who's primary function has been outlived by at least 20 years.
There are few things more annoying than some idiot who has never done anything trying to say definitively how something should be done.
Sua Sponte
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks