UN Security Council Reform

[Conradus]

When did the UN do this? How did the UN do this? The causal link between this assertion and reality does not exist.

Korea could've been a lot worse without the UN.

[Pindar]

Korea could've been a lot worse without the UN.

Are you referring to the UN marital action that occurred after the USSR had removed itself from the UN?

[Conradus]

Are you referring to the UN marital action that occurred after the USSR had removed itself from the UN?

I'm referring to the fact that we didn't have an all-out open war between the US and USSR in Korea, that may be due to common sense of both parties, but the UN also played a part in that. And it showed they could do more than the League who could do nothing when one country invaded another.

[rory_20_uk]

So when one of the 5 countries leaves the UN - who could have blocked it - the UN then works as America and allies go to war wearing a different helmet?

The league was truer to its principles and countries didn't use it as cover to do what they wanted. Warmongers have the decency to be honest and ignore the League rather than subvert it.

[Pannonian]

So when one of the 5 countries leaves the UN - who could have blocked it - the UN then works as America and allies go to war wearing a different helmet?

The league was truer to its principles and countries didn't use it as cover to do what they wanted. Warmongers have the decency to be honest and ignore the League rather than subvert it.

"Reform" of the UN, setting up a "League of Democracies", etc. are all aimed at the same thing - making rules that favour the US and its followers, and forcing the rest of the world to accept it as soime kind of consensus. If the UN unconditionally followed Washington's lead, or if there were other powers that needed to be balanced, there would not be this talk of a useless UN. Instead, as the sole remaining superpower, the US feels it is due the biggest, sole even, say in world affairs, and the rest of the world should accept this reality, shut up, and follow.

America should stop pretending this is some kind of principled review of the UN's design, and flatly state that they want full control of an international body. At least that woud be honest, and would stop insulting our intelligence.

[Pindar]

"Reform" of the UN, setting up a "League of Democracies", etc. are all aimed at the same thing - making rules that favour the US and its followers, and forcing the rest of the world to accept it as soime kind of consensus.

Leaving aside the endless appeal of the black helicopter mind set, the rationale for a "league of democracies" would be to instill legitimacy into an international body along the lines of the UN. Such does not exist now.

America should stop pretending this is some kind of principled review of the UN's design, and flatly state that they want full control of an international body. At least that woud be honest, and would stop insulting our intelligence.

If principle and legitimacy are not considered important, then there is no justification for complaint. Hostility to the US alone is not a justification.

[Pannonian]

Leaving aside the endless appeal of the black helicopter mind set, the rationale for a "league of democracies" would be to instill legitimacy into an international body along the lines of the UN. Such does not exist now.

If principle and legitimacy are not considered important, then there is no justification for complaint. Hostility to the US alone is not a justification.

Once your envuisaged legitimate authority is set up, would you accept its decisions if it ever went against US interests, US sovereignty, even? If that legitimate body ruled that the US had transgressed some part or other of its laws, would you support the imposition of whatever sanctions were prescribed for this? If this UN-equivalent sent troops into the US to enforce its decision, would you welcome them with open arms?

Please answer in the absolute, and don't try and wriggle out of it by saying the US would never transgress - we all know the value of such a claim. If, when it comes to an absolute answer, you still believe in the sovereignty of the US over outside agencies, then stop complaining about a body that allows other countries to do the same. My country is as bad as any, but at least few people here claim the kind of principled puritanism that you espouse.

[Pindar]

I'm referring to the fact that we didn't have an all-out open war between the US and USSR in Korea, that may be due to common sense of both parties, but the UN also played a part in that.

Demonstrate the causal link where the UN determined US and USSR policy after military action commenced.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Are you referring to the UN marital action that occurred after the USSR had removed itself from the UN?

I'll bet that was Clinton's fault...

[Pindar]

I'll bet that was Clinton's fault...

"I did not have sex with that woman."