It can enforce it's resolutions, if they suit the US.
It can enforce it's resolutions, if they suit the US.
"The republicans will draft your kids, poison the air and water, take away your social security and burn down black churches if elected." Gawain of Orkney
Awwwwww just a little patience untill the yellow dragon lifts off to cast big fat fireballs against anyone who knows how to spell economy correctly.Originally Posted by Imao
if the UN could enforce it´s resolutions AND there were no bull**** veto powers....I´d say the world would be a whole lot better off.
"If given the choice to be the shepherd or the sheep... be the wolf"
-Josh Homme
"That's the difference between me and the rest of the world! Happiness isn't good enough for me! I demand euphoria!"
- Calvin
I disagree. The problem with the UN is that most of it's constituent members are not democracies. You can't have dictatorships lording it over democracies. IMO another organisation should be promoted, one that consists of democracies only. Maybe then we might have something that would be workable. Pressure put on the non-democracies to convert, so to speak, may, in some future time be able to actually do something that really matters.Originally Posted by Ronin
There are times I wish they’d just ban everything- baccy and beer, burgers and bangers, and all the rest- once and for all. Instead, they creep forward one apparently tiny step at a time. It’s like being executed with a bacon slicer.
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.”
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.
"The purpose of a university education for Left / Liberals is to attain all the politically correct attitudes towards minorties, and the financial means to live as far away from them as possible."
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
If you look at the UN you´ll see that dictatorships are in the minority....so there is no way they would be able to impose their will over others in the UN.....appointments to special groups like human rights and such would have to take into the account the behavior of the country of course.
In my view what drags the UN more than anything else is the Veto power some countries have....as long as some countries can do anything they want because they have a veto power or because they are buddies with a veto power country the place will never work correctly.
"If given the choice to be the shepherd or the sheep... be the wolf"
-Josh Homme
"That's the difference between me and the rest of the world! Happiness isn't good enough for me! I demand euphoria!"
- Calvin
Chaotic. Such power to the UN as a whole would be to the detriment of such nations as the US and China, who would never allow such a situation.
Anyway, UN is all countries, not a seperate entity as is often implied. If there were consensus resolutions could be enforced. Problem is getting nations to agree to any one resolution, and even then if the UN will actually enforce it or not. More powerful countries can easily dominate the UN, and as I said they would never allow such a situation where they must do what the UN as a whole wants them to do.
Good to see you back, Gawain.![]()
"The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr
Gawain is, as always, good for a laugh.
A UN that could enforce its resolutions would be in a bit of a muddle, since the Security Council and the General Assembly often vote quite differently and the veto powers would still have undue influence/ability to be intransigent. Still, a few things would be handled better -- cease fire blue hat zones and the like.
Were the veto removed and the UN given power to enforce its resolutions, we would see virtually all nations brought over, at least in practice, to social-democratic governments within a generation. The attempt would be made to re-cast most in a model approximating those in Scandanavia.
I don't think that would work, but it would be tried.
"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
So 2/5 of the permenant UN security council doesn't consist of dictatorships?Originally Posted by Ronin
Come on Ice. Everyone knows China is a freer democracy then the United States of Oppression. Just ask any European lefty, they'll tell ya. And poor misunderstood Vladmir Putin. He's just trying to get the mob in line. He'll turn power back over once he does, he even said so.
"A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man."
Don Vito Corleone: The Godfather, Part 1.
"Then wait for them and swear to God in heaven that if they spew that bull to you or your family again you will cave there heads in with a sledgehammer"
Strike for the South
if you think that 2/5 are a majority then I suggest you go back to the math books.....and anyway...the correct value would be 1/5.....I´m not seeing were you are getting the 2nd dictatorship from.Originally Posted by Ice
"If given the choice to be the shepherd or the sheep... be the wolf"
-Josh Homme
"That's the difference between me and the rest of the world! Happiness isn't good enough for me! I demand euphoria!"
- Calvin
The UN is obviously a product of its time, wich required a forum of sorts to deal with international disputes peacefully (among other goals)Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Simply not recognising authoritarian countries would have been counterproductive, the Soviet Union being so powerful at the time. Even now it's simply a reality that we have to deal with dictatures diplomacticly, since replacing all with democracies is not a viable option. We can see that now with the Iraqi insurgency- it's perhaps to premature to tell with certainty that the whole democratization has failed, but doing that with every dictature on the planet is obviously an impossibility.
I'll say this once: I don't really like the UN myself. I like the idealist vision behind it, but the reality is sadly lacking.
There's only a veto power system in the security council, not in any of the other UN institutions.Originally Posted by Ronin
There is nothing wrong with a veto system in itself. The reasoning behind it is very logical - there's no point in a resolution if a major power refuses to abide by it. A preventive veto system merely acknowledges reality.
As far as I know, it suited the US just fine to enforce 1559 but it wasn't. The UN had a dozen resolutions against Saddam Hussein but none of them were enforced.Originally Posted by Idaho
"A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man."
Don Vito Corleone: The Godfather, Part 1.
"Then wait for them and swear to God in heaven that if they spew that bull to you or your family again you will cave there heads in with a sledgehammer"
Strike for the South
Bookmarks