International Organizations

**Kanamori** · 05-17-2005, 17:51

From another topic, I gained interest in the opinions of Adrian and Pindar, regarding the UN and possible future bodies of cooperation or goverance, however it should be put, and the consequences of the different ideas. I believe the intent of keeping the UN as it is now and starting a new, separate organization based on political ideals, would be to reign in corruption. How would the UN and the possible new organiztion interact? I mean, would the corruption and hidden agendas become a part of the interaction between the two organizations, because their interests still remain, even though they are not a part of the UN (assuming that one member of the new organization wished to pursue its interests w/ members in the UN that are not in the new org in such a manner that the interests they were pursuing would affect the policies of the new org)? What would happen if the UN were entirely scrapped, and the countries that now enjoy represenatation in the UN no longer were represented?

**Duke Malcolm** · 05-17-2005, 17:57

they can join the British Commonwealth of Nations, so that when I am Prime Minister, all I have to do is erode at the countries powers into the Commonwealth, then take the Commonwealth, and there we have the British Empire restored!!!!! Mwahahaha!!!!!

Sorry, what happened? I blacked out...

**PanzerJaeger** · 05-17-2005, 20:35

What would happen if the UN were entirely scrapped, and the countries that now enjoy represenatation in the UN no longer were represented?

The world would be a much better place.

Countries working in coalitions are much more efficient than the UN.

**Lazul** · 05-17-2005, 21:57

Id say, scrapp the UN, and rethink the whole thing.... and start a new organization.

**bmolsson** · 05-18-2005, 04:08

In the future we will not have any countries, therefore the use of international organisations like UN will fade away. The evolution the global society is going towards, is for a common currency, language, legal system and law enforcement. In history we can see that small tribes, became small kingdoms, became large kingdomes, became countries, became unions, became federations etc.....

**kiwitt** · 05-18-2005, 04:15

... eventually the "United States of the World", with one president and whole "New World Order"

I am sounding like a conspiracy theorist.

**Papewaio** · 05-18-2005, 04:17

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

What would happen if the UN were entirely scrapped, and the countries that now enjoy represenatation in the UN no longer were represented?

The world would be a much better place.

Countries working in coalitions are much more efficient than the UN.

Why scrap the UN?

In the current situation the US can veto UN votes. So the UN cannot do anything to the US and the US can make coalitions just like before.

Also the US can occasionaly get the UN to do something for it.

So the US has no disadvantages with the UN with the occasional freebie.

If the UN goes, some sort of diplomatic forum would arise to fill the vacuum. The US could be at a far worse disadvantage if it was the APEC-EU-EMEA diplomatic and economic triad with which the US has no veto...

**PanzerJaeger** · 05-18-2005, 05:24

Simply because its extremely corrupt and does nothing in the world coalitions of countries couldnt do better. Its there to make people of disaffected countries feel they have a voice and make people of powerful countries feel like they are giving people a voice but in actuality it usually screws everything up.

Oil for Food?

**Papewaio** · 05-18-2005, 05:29

Like career changes don't leave until you have something (better) lined up...

**PanzerJaeger** · 05-18-2005, 05:34

Apparently President Bush agrees as my opinion is still in the theoretical stage, sadly.

One could say that the UN screwed Iraq from the start even. The resolution should never have been to boot saddam only out of Kuwait - thats not how we deal with dictators. Would it have been enough to kick Hitler out of france?

I wander who wrote the resolution like that.. if it was the US then i can rightly be considered a jackass.

**PanzerJaeger** · 05-18-2005, 05:35

I wander who wrote the resolution like that.. if it was the US then i can rightly be considered a jackass.

Wonder even...

**Papewaio** · 05-18-2005, 06:16

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

I wander who wrote the resolution like that.. if it was the US then i can rightly be considered a jackass.

I think you may find that the US to get support had to have it written that it was to boot out Saddam.

I cannot remember if it was Bush Sr. who decided not to push on or if it was political reasons.

**Paul Peru** · 05-18-2005, 14:17

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

The world would be a much better place.

Yes, instantly! As if by magic! Amazing!

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Countries working in coalitions are much more efficient than the UN.

Yes, those coalitions of the willing, the bribed and the bullied are great. It seems you have to re-bribe them every year, and if some other bullies are more bullyish, they run-a away.

Topic-wise: reform the UN, accountability, transparency, change veto system.