We need to Problem Solve: War-Terror and Poverty!

DARE TO CARE.

We as human beings need to evolve.

We need a human face not more and more combat.

We need to examine our "collective securities".

For all citizens Community Safe must translate as Global Safe.

We need to Make History on Poverty.

Basic needs for all must include a principal on socio-economic justice if we are to address, education, health and income or anything inside a goal of World Peace.

"Many impoverished developing countries are caught in a poverty trap for they do not have the capacity to generate sufficient savings and investments domestically or to attract much foreign direct investment."

"Nor do they have the resources or industry to trade their way out of poverty."

They "require increased aid to fund infrastructure and services essential to their economic and social development."

I totally agree ;

Australia's Foreign Affairs Minister could do alot more to help Australians understand and engage in discussions to raise awareness, about the UN, here at home.

For example he could "make regular statements to parliament on Australian action at the UN, and other ministers could report on action at the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, the International Labour Organization, the World Health Organization, UNESCO and so on."

These statements alone could include a record of how WE as Australian's voted.

They could provide much of the material for campaigns to which would help inform the public about the purposes, work, achievements of the UN and outline more clearly the absolute difficulties being experienced by the UN system.

Thank You John. This is a very good and helpful article.

I don't believe in altruism.

The U.S. is not the only country that pursues its own national agenda. People are tribalistic. Ultimately, the U.N., world peace, history on poverty, etc., are just unrealistic goals. Human nature is like that of any other species -- to propagate, and when resources are scarce, to dominate and eliminate so it can propagate some more.

The difference between the U.S. and other nations is that the U.S. is now so powerful that no one can really counter it. The calls to counter it, I believe are not because people ideologically believe there shouldn't be a leader or winner, but because others want to be the leader or winner, but the U.S. stands in the way of that. Therefore, they want to pull the U.S. down and climb over it.

Advocates of the U.N. either see it as a way of achieving this for their own nations (and therefore, themselves), or of achieving a global diplomatic/bureaucratic/intellectual oligarchy. It's all about advancing one's own power, whether we're talking the U.S. president or some mid-level bureaucrat.

There's no such thing as altruism. Therefore, we need to ask, "which agenda serves my interests best?" In a sense, whilst I don't like being an American colonial outpost, I have to admit that my interests lie with the U.S., not the U.N. and its motley crew of lesser pretenders to the throne. Of course, that doesn't mean I unequivocally support short term excess and bad decisions (eg. Iraq) that may lead to long term loss of power.