Has the UN Failed?

[Norstal]

YOU MENTIONED THE ORGANIZATION THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED!

What's wrong with saying University of Nebraska?

[Zionale]

Does it bring forth freedom and equality, as planned? Yes. Does it try to spread democracy? Yes. Is it doing its job okay? Yes.

Is the world fucked up, now? Yes.

I'll admit the UN isn't great but it isn't responsible for fucking the world over, it is much like the league of nations of today, the world is going to hell and there isn't much it can do about it. The UN does some things right, UNICEF and such as being a good example but it has little influence within the world politically, militarily and economically. As for the world screwing up, to me the powder keg was lit when the US economy collapsed and the western world followed, all the revoloutions and revolts aren't that new, look up the cold war, insurrections were all over the place during that time. It's just that for some reason (Mainly cause nothing was going on revoloution wise during the 1990s and our media blows a lot of things out of proportion) people are all like "Whoa! There are revoloutions everywhere! This is so uncanny!" when in truth the insurrectionary hiatus of the 1990s was the uncanny thing happening.

In short, the UN can't really do shit when it comes to the major problems that plaugue our world right now but it isn't the source of all these problems, sometimes shit just happens and people have to deal with it but those people are not the UN.

[Napkiraly]

Peace? UN failed to made peace!!! Look at Somalia, they never have peace. What I think, is that UN is not US pawn, but UN is the Western's pawn.

That's why the West has been able to get major resolutions passed against Syria.


Oh wait.....

Now has it worked? In some cases yes, in some cases no. The UN has as much power as the great powers will allow it. Even then it can't enforce anything unless other countries commit to it (Specifically talking about peace keeping missions). Even when resolutions are passed, some nations will still tend to ignore it.

Apart from that however, it does do spectacular aid work and it is a good institution to facilitate international diplomacy.

[The United Soviet Socialist Republic]

Yes it has. It has failed more epicly than anything else. Its killed millions, spread capitalism throughout the world, set up countless democracies which have been unstable and ended in genocide, given millions in foriegn aid which mostly went into the hands of dictators. I hate the UN, the UN is a terrible terrible thing.

[Blakk Metal]

Yes it has. It has failed more epicly than anything else. Its killed millions, spread capitalism throughout the world, set up countless democracies which have been unstable and ended in genocide, given millions in foriegn aid which mostly went into the hands of dictators. I hate the UN, the UN is a terrible terrible thing.

I like a source for that.

[Wirbel]

Why do China and Russia get all the power? The US has the big expensive military that does all of the work...

They don't

If you are saying that China and Russia getting all the power is false, I can see.

But if you are saying that the US doesn't do all of the work, I'd like an example of any other country doing anything (other than Israel, because they do a lot also).

[Noobubersland]

They don't

If you are saying that China and Russia getting all the power is false, I can see.

But if you are saying that the US doesn't do all of the work, I'd like an example of any other country doing anything (other than Israel, because they do a lot also).

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/contributors/2012/june12_1.pdf
Note the Yemen contributes more personnel then the US. Added to the fact that the whole Peacekeeping premise was devised by a Canadian, UNESCO was devised by the League of Nations which America was not a part of, etc. To say that no other country works is Nationalist cock-waving

[Mistlight]

They don't

If you are saying that China and Russia getting all the power is false, I can see.

But if you are saying that the US doesn't do all of the work, I'd like an example of any other country doing anything (other than Israel, because they do a lot also).

Here and here
In june 2012, out of 97857 police, troops etc., 141 are from the USA, and the UN is operating all around the world.

Edit: Going from here, the list of fatalities, which should give a good indicator of historic support, out of a total of 3010 deaths, the US has 70, the UK 103, Russia 40, France 108. Going by % of population or just about any other metric, this indicates that the US supports the UN less than the UK or France, but more than Russia. This seems about right I think. Interestingly, Wirbel, Israel had no casualties on that list.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

Certainly not living up to its lofty ambitions, but it doesn't hurt to have around.

[Pope Joan]

The peacekeeping work has been spotty, especially in Africa.

My litmus test is to look for Canada, If they are involved in a mission, it will be legitimate and will not involve (as many) depredItions against civilians.

http://www.unac.org/peacekeeping/en/un- ... inga-chro/

Some of the UN roster of agencies have flatly failed, some have done as well as could be hoped in a fractured world, many have a mixed record.

http://www.scottishlaw.org.uk/scotlaw/i ... lorgs.html

I think UNESCO's work as been largely positive.

[Noobubersland]

The peacekeeping work has been spotty, especially in Africa.

My litmus test is to look for Canada, If they are involved in a mission, it will be legitimate and will not involve (as many) depredItions against civilians.

http://www.unac.org/peacekeeping/en/un- ... inga-chro/

Some of the UN roster of agencies have flatly failed, some have done as well as could be hoped in a fractured world, many have a mixed record.

http://www.scottishlaw.org.uk/scotlaw/i ... lorgs.html

I think UNESCO's work as been largely positive.

Eh, sort of, we still have Rwanda and Bosnia on us. Even if we win out most of the time, we will still have failures

[Mosasauria]

Does it bring forth freedom and equality, as planned? Yes. Does it try to spread democracy? Yes. Is it doing its job okay? Yes.

Is the world fucked up, now? Yes.

This.

[Zionale]

Yes it has. It has failed more epicly than anything else. Its killed millions, spread capitalism throughout the world, set up countless democracies which have been unstable and ended in genocide, given millions in foriegn aid which mostly went into the hands of dictators. I hate the UN, the UN is a terrible terrible thing.

oooooooooookay, someone really has to stop watching the PLA's propaganda films because lots of poeple say THE EXACT OPPOSITE! They say the UN is a bunch of pansy liberals that put money into forgiegn aid that conservatives believe are futile to begin with, not being give to dictators! And that the UN spreads socialist government! Now I don't believe in what the hardcore right-wingers say about it but the EXACT OPPOSITE is just as false.

[Galla-]

it was meant to stop the US and the USSR going to war with each other.

so far its been a smashing success.

If that was its only goal, then it succeeded. It serves no purpose currently, then.

Other than to keep the USA and Russian Federation from going to war, which it is succeeding at quite swimmingly.

[New Sapienta]

If that was its only goal, then it succeeded. It serves no purpose currently, then.

Other than to keep the USA and Russian Federation from going to war, which it is succeeding at quite swimmingly.

I'm pretty sure that's not the job of the UN, considering we are not anywhere near going to war, and not for reasons that have to do with the UN.

[Galla-]

Other than to keep the USA and Russian Federation from going to war, which it is succeeding at quite swimmingly.

I'm pretty sure that's not the job of the UN, considering we are not anywhere near going to war, and not for reasons that have to do with the UN.

Then enlighten us as to what the job of the UN is, if it isn't to ensure that everyone isn't fighting out their disputes and disagreements like it's 1655.

[Radiatia]

I don't have a lot of time for the UN.

Until they scrap the Security Council and the disproportionate influence of the US, Russia, China, France, UK, etc then it will never be a "United Nations" and simply be an ineffective and corrupt organisation.

[New Sapienta]

I'm pretty sure that's not the job of the UN, considering we are not anywhere near going to war, and not for reasons that have to do with the UN.

Then enlighten us as to what the job of the UN is, if it isn't to ensure that everyone isn't fighting out their disputes and disagreements like it's 1655.

To promote global peace, via diplomacy and peacekeeping, while also condemning natons that do bad stuff.

It's goal is not to stop the cliche Russian-American dick measuring contest. And if things are bad enough one nation is considering war, the UN can't really stop them, since their both part of the Security Council.

[Aquitayne]

I don't have a lot of time for the UN.

Until they scrap the Security Council and the disproportionate influence of the US, Russia, China, France, UK, etc then it will never be a "United Nations" and simply be an ineffective and corrupt organisation.

Agreed. Each nation should have the same level of voting power and veto power, otherwise it becomes monopolized and nothing gets done (i.e Syria).

[Pyravar]

My opinion is that ultimately the UN has failed. And all in all its just US's pawn.

Really? The US can't get the shit in Syria to stop thanks to Russia and China. If it was the pawn of the United States, we'd be running the world by now.

*checks* Nope.

Exactly. And the US spends massive tax money on UN projects so they can pass resolutions that people just ignore anyways. Does the UN ever stop human rights violations? Nope. Not really.

[New Sapienta]

I don't have a lot of time for the UN.

Until they scrap the Security Council and the disproportionate influence of the US, Russia, China, France, UK, etc then it will never be a "United Nations" and simply be an ineffective and corrupt organisation.

Agreed. Each nation should have the same level of voting power and veto power, otherwise it becomes monopolized and nothing gets done (i.e Syria).

Of course, this also means the powerful nations can get swarmed by the not-so-well-off nations, getting economic sanctions for simply being rich.

It's a bad system either way.

[Galla-]

Then enlighten us as to what the job of the UN is, if it isn't to ensure that everyone isn't fighting out their disputes and disagreements like it's 1655.

To promote global peace, via diplomacy and peacekeeping, while also condemning natons that do bad stuff.

So basically what I just said gg.

[New Sapienta]

To promote global peace, via diplomacy and peacekeeping, while also condemning natons that do bad stuff.

So basically what I just said.

Except your saying it as if it's the UN's only goal.

Whic is ridiculous, and if it is, the UN cannot do anything about it.

[Tubbsalot]

Not at all? They do a hell of a lot of good work in terms of international health, welfare and equality, and they provide a mechanism for international legitimisation of various activities. They're like the Red Cross, but for everything instead of just medical care.

Even with regards to failed international interventions it's not the UN that fails, it's the triple spectres of the US, Russia and China as seen in the Security Council.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I cannot see it as a pawn of any country. In fact, I think the UN is extremely vulnerable to serious deadlock without a good solution.