Originally posted by: Czar
I agree, if the UN goes away it will take something Major to bring all of those different countries together in a diplomatic talks.Originally posted by: Fencer128
How about this - since no one here (from what I can tell) has catagorically stated that the UN is defunct, serves no good purpose and must be dismantled (and I'd take issue if this was said!)- why not stay in the UN and propose some reforms, publically of course so that they may be scrutinised? If they get shot down and you're still not happy as a country then you can justifiably say "the UN is a hinderance and not a help to us - we're out". However, if some reform occurs, or the reasoning of the argument against the proposals is valid, then the US can stay and get on with it, or at the very least propose different reforms.
Cheers,
Andy
Improving the UN is the best way to improve diplomatic relations in the world without going 50 years in the bast
In order to move this debate on in a constructive way - why don't people post their reform ideas for the UN? That would give plenty of topic for discussion.
Here are some of mine (off the top of my head, so not particularly well thought out):
1. Keep UNSC permanent members but lose vetoes (ie motion carried by majority vote).
2. Have a UN force that is minimally made up by the current UNSC members, with numbers of personnel relating to GDP/military capability of each country.
3. Set a mandatory maximum complience time for all security related resolutions that are passed.
4. Where military intervention is an option in a resolution - make that intervention obvious, unambiguous and explicit, and set measurable and agreed parameters for which such action could be sanctioned against.
Cheers,
Andy