The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The U in UN - United or Untied? > Comments

The U in UN - United or Untied? : Comments

By Josh Sampson, published 31/7/2008

The United Nations: a reactive body and a waste of time or upholder of the principles of democracy and international harmony?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
The United Nations is a sad misnomer.There are NO "united" nations but only power blocks who play the UN card when poer politics come into use.

It has achieved very little because it has been made to serve the needs andambitions of the richest and the most powerful.It is a stage where the major players are USA, UK, EU,and China and the bit players are forced to watch the antic dispositions of the prima donnas.The deux ex machina is oil.Wherever that turns up the next act commences.

Oh,by the way the title of the tragedy that is being enacted before us all,passive spectators that we are, is "The Slow Destruction of the World."
Posted by socratease, Thursday, 31 July 2008 9:58:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey Josh! As marketing co-director of the AMUNC 2008, you would surely be aware of the historical events that have effectively changed the role, scope and efficacy of the UN since its inception in 1945 to replace the League of Nations … an organization that failed to prevent TWO World Wars. Today’s UN is an international organization of 192 sovereign States, founded AFTER the Second World War to maintain international peace and security, develop friendly relations among nations and promote social progress, better living standards and human rights.

Like the global community it was designed to serve, it has undergone several important changes over time, including the establishment, in 2002, of a permanent International Criminal Court, intended to “deter future war criminals, and bring nearer the day when no ruler, no State, no junta and no army anywhere will be able to abuse human rights with impunity." (Then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan)

Also of great significance was the corporatisation and some say partial privatisation of the UN through the proposed but failed ‘Global Compact’ in 2000.

Deliberately starved of major operating funds from several of its largest contributors (as of May 31, 2008, members' arrears to the Regular Budget topped $1.2 billion, of which the United States alone owed $926 million) the UN was forced to enter into ‘partnerships’ with ‘the business community’, a euphemism for many of the worlds largest private corporations, including those which citizen movements have denounced for violations of human and labour rights, environmental destruction and endangering consumers (Multinational Monitor magazine, March 2000)

Today, as the people’s of Viet Nam care for the new generation of their children born with toxic-chemicals-induced deformities, and families in the fragmented Balkan states, Afghanistan, the Republic of Georgia, Iraq, Darfur, Timor Leste and so on search for their missing loved ones among the wreckage of their war-ravaged, irradiated and land-mined communities, wealthy shareholders and executive managers of huge Western military-industrial, agricultural, chemical, finance and resource corporations count their wealth, as UN executives attend UNA-USA Global Leadership Awards Dinners and Corporate Global Issues Breakfast Series
Posted by Sowat, Saturday, 2 August 2008 1:33:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy