»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
US and UN
| The Alley |
|
US and UN |
|
|
fractal007 Senior Member
since 2000-06-01
Posts 1958 |
I've noticed this place is a good cross between civil philosophical/political debate and, well, griping. Thus, with that observation in mind, I post my question here. Is it likely that the US has pulled out of the UN by doing what it has done in the past few weeks, namely going to war without UN approval? A friend of mine claimed that the UN would be completely unable to survive without the US. He claimed that over 40% of the UN's military power comes from the US. What are your opinions? 2+2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2 |
||
| © Copyright 2003 fractal007 - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
My opinion, based on nothing but a gut feeling: We will not pull out of the UN. I think it would take a lot more than this to force us to do that. |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
This is not unprecedented. What was unprecedented was when Bush the First went to the UN to demonstrate the 'New World Order' when he went after Saddam in Gulf War One... Now in Attack of the Clone (sorry couldn't resist that one) Bush 2 has followed the more traditional approach of forming strategic alliances. There was no security council vote to bomb kosovo -- but Clinton did it (and he was right). Prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union it would have been virtually impossible to get security council agreement on anything -- which is why America counted on it's allies to get things done -- such as NATO -- The UN is the UN... and will always be the UN... it is a consulary body -- a place for rhetoric and diplomacy -- not a place to get things done. The better question is -- is this the effective end of NATO? |
||
LoveBug
Moderator
Member Elite
since 2000-01-08
Posts 4697 |
I don't think it's the end of the US's place in the UN or NATO. The US's leaders have stated this over and over again. About the UN being able to exist without the US, I don't think it could either. The center is even in the States! I hope this won't be taken as being arrogant, but you are right about most nations in the world recieving help from the US, and most nations (Unlike France and Germany), remember that. Oh, make me Thine forever |
||
Ringo 
since 2003-02-20
Posts 3684Saluting with misty eyes |
There have only been 3 sanctioned hostile actions taken in the entire history of the United nations, yet there have been numerous countries involved in hostilities over the course of the past 60 years or so, and many of them have involved members of the Security Council that are vilifying the US at this point in history. The Soviet Union (now Russia) was involved in Afghanistan long before we were, as well as building the Iron Curtain, entering Hungary, and several others. They are still involved. Israel, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, and many others are in a constant state of war... yet they remain in the UN. We were involved in Lebanon back in the 80's, Somalia in the 90's, Bosnia (actually one of the sanctioned actions) and we are still Permenant members of the Security Council. All that is happening right now is that we realized that the game wasn't going to happen, so we took our ball and went to the field all by ourselves (almost). This is nothing more than an oppositional child doing what he wants. The main difference is that people are dying, and will continue to do so, and this isn't an argument over staying up past our bedtime. This time,we have a purpose. I hope I explained that right. You kow how my brains are. Imagine all the People living life in peace... |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
