I thought that this thread, and the skepticism Prole' expressed for the UN, are of renewed importance given the current state of affairs.

Civil War in Syria, A resurgent Al Qaeda in Iraq, continuing violence in Afghanistan, unrest and conflict throughout Islamic Africa...the list goes on. At the same time, the USA is continuing a de facto policy of disengagement -- at least militarily -- throughout the Middle East, despite a minority call for greater involvement.

Despite Prole's skepticism, and however kleptomanaically and laggardly the effort, the UN has had some success of late (2013) in Congo.

Should the USA continue to disengage? With the USA seemingly backing away from it's role as de facto "World Policeman" can aggressive UN efforts such as that in the Congo serve as a practical model moving forward? Are states such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Congo capable of forming working democratic institutions on their own? If not, does the UN or any nation have the right/duty to go in and impose order until such institutions can form -- and remember, folks, that Iraq suggests that the process of such an occupation would be decades-long, likely until an entirely new generation reaches 30-35 years of age and real cultural change takes place.

In addition, some of the old comments and writers are eloquent, interesting, and in some cases shockingly "current" despite the age of the thread.