Somalia - same as usual

Without equal funding and equal rights, I don't see the UN doing anything really useful.

But often this is the case with "international organizations." They are merely symbolic. A political tool for those those who want to have something "good" on their resumes. Truth is, that's where a lot of the big draw is. There's obviously no money, but there is a big name, it helps you get to the next higher step and if not, at least you are treated with respect that you don't deserve. I've worked with some groups in the past and I will, except for money, never work with these groups in future.
Do you really think they care about the people they are there to "help?" I know of one very personal case where they sold those people out so they could publish an impressive report to show off how smart they are. I bet thousands suffered because of what they did.
I can't put details up here because of confidentiality issues but if Redleg wants me to confirm this with him I will. Obviously with a promise of confidentiality.
 
Last edited:
A majority rule is a fairer solution as well.
Who says these countries should call all the shots in an organization that is supposed to be equal?

I know it's not perfect but there could be a funding policy. You have to pay so much to be a full voting member and any more money comes from donations. String-free donations.


Oddly enough I think a simple majority vote would be a bad idea I am more in favour of a 65% majority to ensure that you actually do have a solid mandate to carry out actions.

Alternatively you can keep the "veto" but dilute it by allowing it to be over ridden by a majority vote in the general assembly which I think to a large degree may be a more realistic option as it prevents the major powers from imposing their domestic politics into world affairs.
 
Nonsense!

As anti American as so many of those freaks are their is no way in hell I want them dictating anything to the USA. Guaranteed, their decision making would be whatever was against us. I'd rather the USA just do away with the UN. Put it in another country even if they cooperate any less than they have in the past.
 
Last edited:
Yeah the last thing the world needs is an international institution run by its members using the democratic process of majority rule.

That might even be a better idea.

Well it would prevent the ludicrous situations were every nation in the general assembly can support a resolution only to see it torpedoed by one permanent members.
 
Last edited:
Personally I think the UN was a bad idea to start off with but it's what we got and we're stuck with it.

Nonsense!

As anti American as so many of those freaks are their is no way in hell I want them dictating anything to the USA. Guaranteed, their decision making would be whatever was against us. I'd rather the USA just do away with the UN. Put it in another country even if they cooperate any less than they have for the past 60 years.
 
How can the UN be described as democratric? It is a corrupt collection of self-centred agenda-led block voting, producing exactly the opposite of democratic conclusion en masse. So many of its members are despotic regimes, underserving of accreditation. It is saved only by the Veto available to the Security council. America must continue to provide world leadership, either inside or outside the UN, which should only ever be allowed responsibilty as a talking shop, and even then with a large pinch of salt. It needs to be led by the nose.
The alternative would be a bloody and chaotic nightmare. Membership should be strictly vetted for acceptance. What do you want - USA influence, or that of hundreds of Mugabes? Answers on a postcard please.
 
Last edited:
Which is why majority rule is such a big No-no. Take a look at the countries which are now attempting to dictate through weight of numbers. Corrupt and despotic in so many cases, culturally and politically primitive to boot in many others.
 
703db434.jpg
032cb3ac.gif
 
Back
Top