People Bashing the U.N and Goverment AID.

Ok so I created this thread to stop derailing another thread.

There is this view, mostly in the U.S but less so in the so called 3rd world countries, that the U.N is a corrupt institution that cant get anything accomplished.

While the U.N as any other corrupt institution in the world has certain degree of corruption (that in udiniable) people who have benefited directly from their actions can see how much good they do for the world.

One of the main criticism against its that is inefective or that it doesnt really does the job its suppoused to like doing peace keeping. But this mainly do to a lack of funding and intervantion from big powers against their designated missions.

edited 27th Aug '11 11:36:45 AM by Baff

The greatest problem with the UN is how dubious it's purpose and functions are. A world-binding organization may exist in two forms - either as a genuine world government, which would reduce the individual states to mere provinces of United Earth (not necessarily a bad thing, you know) which will have the authority to impose global decisions and the sufficient might to make individual nations to obey them, or as a pretty international forum, which will consist of loads and loads of talking without any attempts to meddle within the states' affairs.

Meanwhile, it seems that the UN is a type 2 organization trying to act as type 1. Such situation is flawed, and hence draws criticism. The UN may evolve into a genuine world government, or admit that it is a purely consultative organization. Nevertheless, the current state of the UN is a embarrassment to the organization.

Imo, the only problem with the UN is that both the USA and the Russians have veto'ed stuff like 200 times each since 1945.

THANK YOU. No, really. Thank you.

Because of things like this, it's a strong opinion of mine that the UN doesn't get half of the recognition or reputation it fucking deserves. The people who bash it don't really know much about what it does, and while there IS a corruption problem, that's no reason to get rid of it. That's a reason to improve it. So your life's not perfect? Why don't you commit suicide?

You can probably tell this is a bit of a pet issue of mine.

I'd like to fucking see the US army do the work the UN does. You think those clueless trigger-happy overfed assholes are good at logistics? Fuck battlespace logistics, try this shit globally. And in some of the worst, least stable places on this planet.

It's one of the many reasons why this needs to be taken above any matter of national politics. It's simply too important a job to ever be subject to this bullshit.

edited 27th Aug '11 12:29:40 PM by Gault

Anyone who talks about "the U.N." and "world government" with a straight face is delusional and knows virtually nothing.

First, the U.N. barely functions except as a stooge for the U.S., mostly because we're strangling it by refusing to pay our bills. So they kowtow to the President and function as an arm for the U.S. military, and they're still vilified. That's cold.

As for gov't aid, there isn't such a thing. Well, it looks good in newspapers and provides some nice photo ops for the Pentagon. But no one ever sends money without expecting some sort of dividend — even the angelic Swedes wouldn't do that.

Correct. The UN isn't anything close to a world government and never really was intended to be. Although I'm slightly surprised to find that it's primarily the US and Russia who (ab)use their veto power so much while China just sits on it. You'd think China would use it more, wouldn't you?

Next time your president gives a speech (whoever it is), will you kindly remind him to pay his fucking taxes?

For me, it's not so much bashing as it's a concern that it could be shaped to be better at its job it's supposed to do. But then there's the concern that it might go too far in that direction.

People are afraid of a world government because you have countries within the world that have very widely varying interpretations of how the world should be run. As such, the UN as it is is kind of a formality, really. Which is a shame because it could be so much more. But as is the norm, infighting tends to win out.

Now that is a legitimate issue. Okay.

There is an argument to be made for the preservation of sovereignty, and the danger of ceding too much leverage to some obnoxious foreign power. Hobbesian world out there. On the other hand, the US's good faith has been precisely zero. And there is no guarantee that another dominant power (be it China or whoever) wouldn't do the same thing.

Bottom line: I would rather the U.N. not exist at all then do... whatever it does now. Fight overseas wars that the U.S. can't get away with fighting directly. That's ridiculous.

edited 27th Aug '11 12:51:16 PM by johnnyfog

I'd feel a lot more comfortable about the damn thing if you got rid of the security council veto. That said, anything that does pass, unless the process of getting it past the naysayers has warped it into oblivion, is something I'd take extremely seriously indeed. And yeah, things like UN aid projects do wonderful work.

Eh, recent troper postings have left me feeling less... ill-disposed, towards the organisation.

The United States is not solely at fault on the good faith issue. It's a self-perpetuating cycle wherein we're seen as aggressive by any number of other nationalities who proceed to act hostile towards us, and your average American will get defensive (naturally) which in turn will make them look aggressive, starting the cycle all over again.

The two U.N. powers that have refused to recognize majority opinion are U.S. and Israel. When one speaks of 'aggressive' foreign powers, those are the ones not invited to the U.N. at all. The whole idea behind the U.N., like NATO, is that its participants can't cancel each other out. Like NATO, however, Bush/Obama runs the whole show.

Basically, the U.N. can't operate properly because we do whatever we feel like. The psychology "well, Russia would do the same thing in our position" is partly supportable, but it still doesn't justify the dick-waving behavior of guys like John Bolton.

All right, let's hear some instances of this cycle?

edited 27th Aug '11 12:59:36 PM by johnnyfog

Examples of what? Culturally, that happens. Go to any online forum wherein a sizable portion of the userbase is American and another sizeable portion is not and count how many times fireworks flare up. For a more extreme example, you try being an American tourist in any country that's not Canada.

Unless you mean in the political sense, in which case I can't speak on my country's actions either way, since I have no control over them not being of legal voting age.

The Chinese have only used the veto six times though

Fake Edit: I should do some research before hyperboling.

edited 27th Aug '11 1:00:07 PM by whaleofyournightmare

Surprised to see Britain vetoing stuff so often.

Yep, just look up the security council veto statistics and you will get a clear vision of how the system works.

@ Chainy. I know.

What would we get if the UN shut down though? I bet this world would turn from crapsack to something that makes East London look respectable.

I think what the UN needs more than anything is a thorough reforming, and possibly a lot more authority.

But the United States wont give the UN that authority. 9/10, the USA treats the UN as a fucking irritant trying to stop the USA having fun.

The United States doesn't need to give the UN that authority, providing that the rest of the world was willing to band together and demand that we treat them like equals.

Of course, that won't happen, because, again, infighting.

I concur with Whale.

If the US didn't choke the UN (and the US has been using the UN as a smokescreen for a while - Korean War anyone?) reform would be better.

But what kind of reform? How does it need to reform?

The UN is sort of like the adult babysitter presiding over a house with 193 squabbling children. Some of them are relatively well-behaved but there are many others who are not. And the babysitter is dependent on those squabbling children for his pay.

Can you be surprised that they end up pulling on the drapes?

edited 27th Aug '11 1:11:08 PM by Gault

Fuck if I know.

Just because I know a problem needs to be fixed doesn't mean I have the solution. If I did, I'd run the world by now.

As the only military superpower on this planet, the USA is the power that can give the UN alot of authority.

edited 27th Aug '11 1:11:15 PM by whaleofyournightmare

Okay, fine... but what needs to be fixed?

AFAIK, the UN seems to do a pretty amazing job for the scope and scale of what it is.