• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The United Nations and the US Civil War

Yzzim

Lifer
What would have happened if the United Nations would have been around when the United States was in Civil War? I was watching the History Channel last night and they had a few Civil War documentaries on. While I was watching them I couldn't help but think of what would have happened if the UN would have been around in those days.

Would the UN have stepped in? If so, what would have happened? I figure one of two things would have happened:

1) The UN would have brought the North and the South to the table and things would have been settled peacefully, saving millions upon millions of lives.

or

2) With the UN stepping in and keeping both sides from settling things by war, the hate would have grown between the North and the South. For all we know the Mason Dixon line would currently be the boundries between two opposing countries.

What do you guys think?
 
The UN would step in and fail miserably at diplomacy and use of force. The North and the South would have called a temp truce, beat the UN bulls-eyes'...err..Peace Keepers back into the Atlantic and then continued the Civil War.


Lethal
 
I can't logically see how the UN could have existed back that far, but I'll try to play.

Would we apply todays UN to the past or the past to today's UN. Would the UN be majorly dependent on US military to function? Would the UN be as diverse as to include less industrialized countries? Did those countries even exist then?

I just can't think outside the matrix here...
 
I have no freaking clue. If this were to happen today I can't see the UN stepping in. At least not in any meaningful way. As far as what would have happened then there's just no way to intelligently speculate on that imo. Way too many variables.
 
Originally posted by: Yzzim

1) The UN would have brought the North and the South to the table and things would have been settled peacefully, saving millions upon millions of lives.

Pretty sure 620,000 died. Just FYI.
 
Originally posted by: Caanon
Originally posted by: Yzzim

1) The UN would have brought the North and the South to the table and things would have been settled peacefully, saving millions upon millions of lives.

Pretty sure 620,000 died. Just FYI.

well, think of their babies, and their baby's babies, etc etc etc

after a couple generations it's millions and millions... 😉
 
The UN is currently and inept useless "feel good" organization that couldn't get out of it's own way on a good day so how do you think they could have even functioned 160 years ago considering the lack of communication and transportation technology we possess today? How could the UN have even existed without a true superpower to do it's dirtywork?
 
Originally posted by: Ronstang
The UN is currently and inept useless "feel good" organization that couldn't get out of it's own way on a good day so how do you think they could have even functioned 160 years ago considering the lack of communication and transportation technology we possess today? How could the UN have even existed without a true superpower to do it's dirtywork?

this is all just purely hypothetical...obviously.

Just say one of the "superpowers" of the day (probably Britain or France?) strongly backed the UN and wanted a peaceful resolution to what was happening in the US.
 
Originally posted by: Yzzim
Originally posted by: Ronstang
The UN is currently and inept useless "feel good" organization that couldn't get out of it's own way on a good day so how do you think they could have even functioned 160 years ago considering the lack of communication and transportation technology we possess today? How could the UN have even existed without a true superpower to do it's dirtywork?

this is all just purely hypothetical...obviously.

Just say one of the "superpowers" of the day (probably Britain or France?) strongly backed the UN and wanted a peaceful resolution to what was happening in the US.
I already made my point......the UN is worthless today and what makes you think it wouldn't have been worthless 160 years ago or more so considering the technology handicaps they would have suffered at that period in history?

 
they wouldn't have had the power to do anything. projection of power against america? thats doubtful, esp since the us was no longer a bunch of tniy colonies. the un is not quick acting, and the civil war weapons developed/developing would outclass anything the europeans shipped over. probably would reunite the us temporarily against invasion😛 un probably woulda done nothing, the french etc thought the us experiement was quaint and bound to fail, just as their own dabbling in democracies had always led to failure.
 
Lets see The UN would probably negotiate a ceasefire and implement trade sanctions on the south. The terms of the ceasefire would require the south to let in inspectors to oversee the transition from a slaveholding state to a non slaveholding state. After a few years of trying to hide the slaves from the inspectors the south would kick the inspectors out and start thumbing their noses at the UN. In an attempt to keep the southern children from starving the UN would initiate a Cotton for food program to be overseen by the Secretary general of the UN and his cronies secretly enriching themselves in the process. The North would demand that the UN force the south to abide by the terms of the ceasefire. The UN will issue resolution after resolution demanding that the south allow the slave inspectors to return which the south will ignore. The top dogs at the UN will continue to make scads of cash off the cotton for food program and allow the south to funnel some of the proceeds away to start buying military hadware on the sly from France, Germany, and Russia. The North finally driven to the end of it patience will give the UN an ultimatum to get the inspectors back in there or we will do it ourselves at which time the north commences a massive military build up on the souths Border. The south in an attempt to pacify the UN and keep the north from attacking them agrees to give a full and complete accounting of their freed slaves and allow inspectors to return. The final UN resolution Authorizes military action should the South not complay and be found in material breach. The Souths report accounting for their freed slaves is woefully incomplete and appears in many areas to be fraudulent. The Inspectors finds slaves that were not yet freed and orders the south to free them as it puts them in direct violation of every UN resolution issued by the UN in the past 10 years since the ceasefire. In other cases it becomes obvious that the Southerners are hiding their slaves from them and not allowing the inspectors access to government officials for interviews concerning the slaves. The North having finally ran out of patience after 10 years and 14 UN resolutions declares the South in materiel breach of the UN resolution and attacks the South defeating it quickly and decisively in spite of the UN. Unfortunately they found practically no slaves after all but they did uncover evidence Of hundreds of thousands of people that were murdered and buried secret mass graves. Currently they are still looking for all the missing slaves😉 and France, Germany, and Russia are raising cane wanting to know who is going to pay for all the stuff they sold the south on credit.

Hows' that?
 
The UN usually doesn't get involved in Civil Wars. They might provide Humanitarian Aid or work at getting the 2 sides to settle their differences peacefully, but they wouldn't just come in and force the 2 sides into a Peace.
 
Back
Top