Sounds good to me, but unfortunately that measure doesn't have a chance in hell of passing. Will it even come to a vote? I hope so...for curiosity's sake I would at least like to see how many yeas it garners.
I could live with Fencer's reform package (for starters), but it would never happen. Are you kidding me? No Perm 5 is going to part with their veto power. And as for the EU idea, Russia doesn't want France to lose its seat any more than the U.S. wants the UK out. Even if the EU was capable of constructing a coherent foreign policy that measure is a non-starter. So we are stuck with those has-been countries pulling the strings while modern powers like Japan and Germany are left out in the cold.
At any rate you should add to that list some serious reforms in all the various subcommittees. No more Syrias on the Human Rights Commission, no more Iraqs on the disarmament committee, etc. But that won't happen either. Everyone in the UN could see how ridiculous that situation was from Day 1, but no one ever did anything about it. So what could possibly motivate them to do so now?
No, I'm afraid you can't build a skyscraper on a faulty foundation. The UN is rotten to the core and the underlying problems can never be weeded out IMO--the flaws are inherent in the charter. The only real option available to us is to disband it entirely and create a third League of Nations (third time's the charm, maybe?).
Unfortunately, the rest of the world still has some misguided faith in the UN. You have only to look at how melodramatic posters in this thread became at the mere suggestion of U.S. nonparticipation to see that. LOL, we had people practically going into hysterics with bizarre references to large border walls, inbreeding, and gun-toting rednecks. Clearly there are plenty of people out there whose disproportionately optimistic view of the UN has led them to overreact to what is a very legitimate proposal on Ron Paul's part in light of the UN's long history of failure. It's nice to see that sort of mindless mob mentality is alive and well around the world, beyond the confines of the resurgent "U R n0t Patr10t1c" crowd here in America.
AFAIC the best option *is* for the U.S. to leave the UN. Stop supporting that crippled organization in pursuit of a dead dream. Take a stand, which is something no other country seems capable of doing. With the U.S. gone the floodgates for America's enemies will be open and the UN will officially devolve into an assembly line for anti-U.S. resolutions. But by then, deprived of its largest source of military and financial backing, the impotence of the UN will be even more apparent. Eventually, when even the most pig-headed of UN backers can no longer honestly hold their precious baby up as a shining example of effective international action, the U.S. can return and propose a new structure along the lines of Fencer's proposals.
So that's what I would like the U.S. to do, but of course it has no chance of happening either. It seems we are doomed to watch our country prop up this perpetually infirm world body while everyone stands around pretending it actually does something, that we're making a real difference in the world, and that no reforms are needed. Goddamn politics...
Facebook
Twitter