i'm pissed at the UN right now.

[UpsideDownFlag]

i hope this isn't taken the wrong way- i like the UN- but it seems all i'm hearing about is their inaction regarding the Sudan genocide/civil war/pillaging etc. WHY aren't they doing anything? is there something i'm missing??

[Cobia]

1. They allowed a bunch of people to be massacred in Burundi

Well for Sudan the Sudanese want no UN troops, just a little aid.

The militas might very well shoot it out with UN troops and would not be good.

[Maple]

2. The UN is a committee

not an autonomous body.

It can't do anything by itself.

The members of the Security council have to choose to do something.

One of those members is the U.S.

[WMliberal]

9. nuff said right there

[Djinn]

3. what do you want them to do

don't get me wrong I'd like to see and end to the suffering of the people of Darfur too but I see a lot of people saying the UN should do "something" without articulating what that something should be.

The UN has no army, it relies on the forces of nations, if they aren't willing to send troops there's SFA the UN can do. They also need to be wary about exacerbating a situation - right now the government of Sudan does not want foreign troops there, so for that to happen it would have to be a hostile invasion which would result in Sudanese flocking to the area to "defend" their homeland.

[UpsideDownFlag]

4. have they pressured any member nations to do anything?

at all?

they have peacekeeping forces, right?

[Cobia]

6. I heard 300 African troops were on there way

Any updates?

[merh]

7. Face it, without the US as a member willing to assist in the bartering

the UN is somewhat restricted.

Because the clown-n-chief has screwed up our reputation in the international community and because we just as unpredictable as a rouge nation, we have no "pull" in the international community. (Unless of course, you consider the bully stance we have taken with those lil bitty nations that make up the "coalition of the willing" that are in debt to us.)

The U.S. as a super power, pre-*&Co., could assist the UN in getting the other nations to act.

Now we are as lame as a two (2) legged horse.

[Cobia]

8. Those other nations are members of the UN

If they want the UN to act, they will make it.

[merh]

15. Face it, we WERE the super power with the strongest human rights

agenda. We once had the standing in the international community that encouraged the notion that no nation had the right to violate human rights and if we stood against the nation, if we objected to the human rights violations, other nations stood along side of us.

Now, we are the nation that is violating another nations human rights.
We are the evil that we once took a stand against.

[K-W]

16. You are whitewashing history.

I hate to break it to you, but the US has never been that strong on human rights or encouraging human rights. Iraq is not an exception to the rule, it fits pretty well in our pattern of international behavior.

[merh]

31. I appreciate what you are saying, but, I also know the "image"

that we held. *&co. didn't care about the image and just said f'u to the rest of the world. Are image was questionable before, but no evidence in the international world to truly detract from our "superiority", that is not until *&co.

Of course, this is just mho.

[Djinn]

10. nope

the peacekeeping forces also come from member nations - and there is no peace to keep right now.

[Cobia]

5. Ala Somalia

[Wheelie_Alex]

11. This is what pisses me off about the UN...

They CAN act on their own without the US, but have gotten to used to having the US take the lead every time. If that is the case, what fucking good are they? Sudan is a golden opportunity for them to get their act together and act. There are more troops in the world than just Americans. The member nations could all chip in and come up with more than enough troops and money, but nooooo. They sit around with their thumbs up their asses waiting for a blessing from the US.
Useless, absolutely useless. I have no faith in that bunch of asshats.

I am not anti-UN because of US soveriegnty like others, I feel they are useless because of their own inaction. Either grow some balls, grow up and stop looking to the US for everything or just go away. Ask the people of the Sudan if the UN has been of any help.

[Cobia]

12. US has the best trained soldiers and money

Most armies are like glorified rent a cops.

[K-W]

13. It cannot do anything without the US's blessing.

Thats what being part of the security council means.

[Cobia]

14. Or Russia, China, France, GB

[Wheelie_Alex]

17. I don't think the US...

would stand in the way of the UN making a go of it in the Sudan.

[K-W]

18. Where do you think the UN peacekeeping forces come from?

If countries arent willing to spare the troops, they arent going to move on the sudan issue.

[Wheelie_Alex]

19. See what I mean? Useless!

[K-W]

21. Well certainly, we need a true UN

In the end the UN is beholden to a handful of countries. We need a UN where countries at the very least get proportional representation.

[Djinn]

22. easy to say from the safety of the US

there are MANY people in the world who would disagree with you that the UN is useless.

There is a difference between "not perfect" and "useless"

[K-W]

23. good point, what if there was no UN

things would look alot worse. In the course of human history it is a big step forward.

[Wheelie_Alex]

24. What good is the UN if when the US says no..

it is no? If that is the case, just shut their doors and make all of the members ambassadors to the US. Then they can come to the US with their hat in their hand and grovel. It amounts to almost the same thing they are doing now.

Hell if I was the leader of a country I wouldn't go to the UN at all. Just go straight to the US, since it is they who will decide anyway.

[Djinn]

25. what good is the UN??

ask the people who have clean water and health care, who have access to refugee resettlement, who are protected daily by peace keeping troops, the child soldiers who are rehabilitated, the women who can feed their families because of micro-loan schemes, the kids who are still alive because they were immunized.

All because of the UN, they could do more if member countries bothered to pay their dues.

You state that:

"Hell if I was the leader of a country I wouldn't go to the UN at all. Just go straight to the US, since it is they who will decide anyway."

That's just the point - the leaders of the nation in question DON'T WANT troops in their country, the UN can not authorize a hostile invasion - it's own charter states that unless another sovereign nation is being attacked other nations can not forcibly intervene.

What do YOU suggest the UN should do? hire a battalion of mercenaries?

[Wheelie_Alex]

27. So then bitching about the US's inaction on this should cease.

[K-W]

26. They arent perfect, it doesnt mean they dont do some good.

Think for a second before posting. Just because something isnt perfect, doesnt mean you destroy it. That kind of aweful logic is all too prevelent among american liberals these days.

[Wheelie_Alex]

28. They are not perfect, I know.

And maybe useless is too strong a word. But taking them seriously as a world body when their every action hinges on the favor of the US is impossible.

[K-W]

29. Its not thier fault your expectations are too high.

They are what they are. They are alot more than the world ever had before. Progress takes time, progress takes generations. The UN should be taken seriously, it is a serious thing, it just isnt, apparently what you thought it was.

[Cobia]

20. The UN already has troops in the Congo, Angola and elsewhere

Only so many troops to go around.

[tedzbear]

30. Maybe it would help if the United States leaned on it more.

After all, the USA is a veto member of the security council.