The UN is overrated and just a facade!

[Hetric]

The UN is weak-willed and ineffectual. They have shown their unwilling to stop crimes against humanity and genocide in civil wars throughout the globe.

A list of failures:

Cambodia
the former Yugoslavia
Rwanda
East Timor
Sierra Leone

The new troops will be too afraid to take over the situation down in Darfur!

[Gee_Queen]

Not for me!

[a label is]

The UN is weak-willed and ineffectual.

Well, wouldn't really call them "weak-willed". I believe they are pretty conscious bout what they are doing.

I agree with you. It is definitely to be questioned that they are so highly rated, regarding facts from the past and present - in the end everything is regulated into the direction of Western ideas and values.

[Christoph]

The sub-organizations like UNICEF and UNCHR are far from being weak-willed.

[dweiss]

The UN is weak-willed and ineffectual. They have shown their unwilling to stop crimes against humanity and genocide in civil wars throughout the globe.

The UN has had its difficulties, to put things mildly, but the true issue is that that the nations and peoples of the planet are the ones that are weak-willed, ineffectual, and unwilling to act and intervene. Never forget that the UN, as an entity, can do no more than its collective membership allows. It can and probably should be stronger and more proactive, but that is not the role its members have chosen to permit in most cases. Neverthless, its power has grown somewhat over time and will continue to do so. As people and their national governments evolve and demand more positive action, only then will the UN be able to provide it.

Perhaps the good news is that the UN is there so that when the people of the world wake up and decide to act the UN exists as a mechanism through which they will be able to do so. And, ultimately, given the constraints imposed on it, the truth may be that the UN has been more effective than anyone could reasonably expect.

-Danny.

[Christoph]

Welcome dweiss!

The UN has had its difficulties, to put things mildly, but the true issue is that that the nations and peoples of the planet are the ones that are weak-willed, ineffectual, and unwilling to act and intervene. Never forget that the UN, as an entity, can do no more than its collective membership allows. It can and probably should be stronger and more proactive, but that is not the role its members have chosen to permit in most cases. Neverthless, its power has grown somewhat over time and will continue to do so. As people and their national governments evolve and demand more positive action, only then will the UN be able to provide it.

Perhaps the good news is that the UN is there so that when the people of the world wake up and decide to act the UN exists as a mechanism through which they will be able to do so. And, ultimately, given the constraints imposed on it, the truth may be that the UN has been more effective than anyone could reasonably expect.

-Danny.

Well spoken Danny.
I believe that UN is fixed in a 'paradox' situation: The UN is as strong as the member states want it to be. And the governments have lost their way a long time ago when it comes to going the right way. And not even the people can change this.
The true power of the UN comes from every single member state/government but also the true weakness. It is like shooting in his own foot. Over and over again.

[greenpeace_mike]

What are they actually doing?

[Christoph]

What are they actually doing?

What do you mean?

[greenpeace_mike]

I mean how powerful are they? They are losing all the time.

[Christoph]

I mean how powerful are they? They are losing all the time.


I wouldn't say "they are losing" but they should definitly get their business straight.