Replace the UN with something not involving Russia?

[Novorobo]

A year ago, Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine shot down a civilian airplane, killing hundreds of people.

And yet, today, Russia still has a role in the UN.

I'm not privy to the details, other than that the UN supposedly doesn't have the authority to just kick a country out just like that. If that's the case, why not just start over, and create an organization for the express purpose of keeping Russia from having a role in it?

[Pandeeria]

And while we're at it let's kick out North Korea as well.

[Latonos]

There is already. It's called NATO, and it is pissing the Russians off extensively.

Besides, that's just asking for a war with Russia. At least with the UN, you get to have forced diplomacy before you attempt to violently kill each other. Without that balance, I'm pretty sure war would just break out.

[Pandeeria]

There is already. It's called NATO, and it is pissing the Russians off extensively.

Besides, that's just asking for a war with Russia. At least with the UN, you get to have forced diplomacy before you attempt to violently kill each other. Without that balance, I'm pretty sure war would just break out.

There would not be a war with Russia if either the US or countries like France or Britain overlooks the creation and regulation of the new organization.

What lots of people fail to realize is that Russia isn't the scary, Soviet bear it once was. You can piss the Russians off all you want. As long as the vice of economics and nuclear weapons are in play, all Russia can do is remain pissed off. Until of course eventually they would have to submit.

[Psichikou]

Because Russia has a massive geopolitical role in the region, controls about an eighth of the land surface of the earth, and has the 6th largest GDP per capita and the 15th largest nominal GDP (IMF). The UN is supposed to be a forum for the peaceful resolution of conflict, not an alliance. If you're looking for an organization to combat the influence of Russia or to defend against Russia, it's called NATO.

In short, that would be absurd.

[New Werpland]

The un is pretty flawed yes.

[Periodspace]

A year ago, Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine shot down a civilian airplane, killing hundreds of people.

And yet, today, Russia still has a role in the UN.

I'm not privy to the details, other than that the UN supposedly doesn't have the authority to just kick a country out just like that. If that's the case, why not just start over, and create an organization for the express purpose of keeping Russia from having a role in it?

Were these separatists backed by the Russian government?

[MERIZoC]

See, that would defeat the whole purpose of the organization.

[New Werpland]

A year ago, Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine shot down a civilian airplane, killing hundreds of people.

And yet, today, Russia still has a role in the UN.

I'm not privy to the details, other than that the UN supposedly doesn't have the authority to just kick a country out just like that. If that's the case, why not just start over, and create an organization for the express purpose of keeping Russia from having a role in it?

Were these separatists backed by the Russian government?

It's fairly obvious yes, even shof might admit it.

[The Serbian Empire]

See, that would defeat the whole purpose of the organization.

At this point, the UN has no purpose other than to use the US as it's military.

[Latonos]

There is already. It's called NATO, and it is pissing the Russians off extensively.

Besides, that's just asking for a war with Russia. At least with the UN, you get to have forced diplomacy before you attempt to violently kill each other. Without that balance, I'm pretty sure war would just break out.

There would not be a war with Russia if either the US or countries like France or Britain overlooks the creation and regulation of the new organization.

What lots of people fail to realize is that Russia isn't the scary, Soviet bear it once was. You can piss the Russians off all you want. As long as the vice of economics and nuclear weapons are in play, all Russia can do is remain pissed off. Until of course eventually they would have to submit.

Until you realise that Russia controls a shittonne of land and a shittonne of nuclear weapons and is actively developing fifth-generation fighter jets alongside the US and China, and speaking of China, there's that card to play as well. Even if the Western World tries to diplomatically isolate Russia (hint: it already is), Russia will just turn to China who is the single biggest non-partisan on the planet and will happily supply them with foreign currency, raw materials and a valued trade partner - and with China, Russia then has access to developing African markets that are linking with Chinas. Yay.

[Benuty]

Then it would just be "Mostly United Nations".

[MERIZoC]

Then it would just be "Mostly United Nations".

That…..was honestly one of the most beautiful quotes I've seen on this forum.

[Psichikou]

See, that would defeat the whole purpose of the organization.

At this point, the UN has no purpose other than to use the US as it's military.

But what about all those strongly-worded letters and sending those incompetent brave Bangladeshi and Ethiopian soldiers to Chad, Sudan, DRCongo and other cesspools troubled countries?

[MERIZoC]

See, that would defeat the whole purpose of the organization.

At this point, the UN has no purpose other than to use the US as it's military.

Bull.

[The Krogan]

You can't just kick Russia out, it would make things even worse.

[The Krogan]

See, that would defeat the whole purpose of the organization.

At this point, the UN has no purpose other than to use the US as it's military.

Actually I think the U.S. isn't actually even one of the countries that contributes the most amount of troops to U.N. missions anymore, though they do contribute a lot of money instead.

[Napkiraly]

See, that would defeat the whole purpose of the organization.

At this point, the UN has no purpose other than to use the US as it's military.

Like how they sanctioned the Iraq War back in 03 right? Oh wait.

[Napkiraly]

has the 6th largest GDP per capita

I think you mean just GDP. GDP per capita Russia is 49the (PPP) and 57th (nominal).

[The Serbian Empire]

At this point, the UN has no purpose other than to use the US as it's military.

Bull.

They're just trying to justify their own existence when it's really just an 8 nation power show in the Security Council. As long as there's veto power held by any country, there will be totalitarians committing genocide and other atrocities.

[Pandeeria]

There would not be a war with Russia if either the US or countries like France or Britain overlooks the creation and regulation of the new organization.

What lots of people fail to realize is that Russia isn't the scary, Soviet bear it once was. You can piss the Russians off all you want. As long as the vice of economics and nuclear weapons are in play, all Russia can do is remain pissed off. Until of course eventually they would have to submit.

Until you realise that Russia controls a shittonne of land and a shittonne of nuclear weapons and is actively developing fifth-generation fighter jets alongside the US and China, and speaking of China, there's that card to play as well. Even if the Western World tries to diplomatically isolate Russia (hint: it already is), Russia will just turn to China who is the single biggest non-partisan on the planet and will happily supply them with foreign currency, raw materials and a valued trade partner - and with China, Russia then has access to developing African markets that are linking with Chinas. Yay.

The developed world in Europe and the Americas offers a lot more than what China offers to Russia.

[Novorobo]

There is already. It's called NATO, and it is pissing the Russians off extensively.

Besides, that's just asking for a war with Russia. At least with the UN, you get to have forced diplomacy before you attempt to violently kill each other. Without that balance, I'm pretty sure war would just break out.

Reminds me of Churchill's statement about choosing between war and shame. At what point do we decide that enough is enough?

As for NATO, it doesn't have Sweden. I'm not sure why, but I'm guessing it isn't solidarity with Russia. I doubt a country so progressive on gay rights would want solidarity with a country that is synonymous with beating gays to within an inch of their lives.

[New Rogernomics]

I doubt that western nations are seriously considering a more substantive form of world governance, given the difficulties the European Union is having currently.

Even a confederation is way off, as western nations can't agree on a lot of issues.

For now at least, a UN with Russia and other nations is the next best thing.

[The New Sea Territory]

A year ago, Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine shot down a civilian airplane, killing hundreds of people.

And yet, today, Russia still has a role in the UN.

I'm not privy to the details, other than that the UN supposedly doesn't have the authority to just kick a country out just like that. If that's the case, why not just start over, and create an organization for the express purpose of keeping Russia from having a role in it?

First, this is so hilariously biased. It's a cold warrior-esque mentality. Russia could easily say the same thing, by saying "The US invaded Iraq, a country that never attacked them, on bullshit charges. We should make an organization without them in it."

Secondly, this is a bad idea. Isolating Russia even more won't make things better.

[Novorobo]

A year ago, Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine shot down a civilian airplane, killing hundreds of people.

And yet, today, Russia still has a role in the UN.

I'm not privy to the details, other than that the UN supposedly doesn't have the authority to just kick a country out just like that. If that's the case, why not just start over, and create an organization for the express purpose of keeping Russia from having a role in it?

First, this is so hilariously biased. It's a cold warrior-esque mentality. Russia could easily say the same thing, by saying "The US invaded Iraq, a country that never attacked them, on bullshit charges. We should make an organization without them in it."

Secondly, this is a bad idea. Isolating Russia even more won't make things better.

US intelligence screwed up on WMDs, and many Americans wanted the US to liberate Iraq but didn't think it through. Pushing it as it is, but still a whole different ball game than what Russia's doing.

Isn't it the influence of Russia that's preventing the UN from investigating the crash site to prove it was the separatists who did it? Replacing that with an organization that won't let Russia obstruct justice sounds like an improvement to me.