Do we really want or need the UN?
What good has it ever achieved in real terms?
What good has membership of it ever done for Australia?
What have we got in return for the our billions of dollars we've gifted it across the years?
Yes, in the field of health and disaster relief it has achieved a few things, but the simple fact is that far more could have been achieved by other charities etc if they'd been given even HALF the money the UN efforts cost.
The UN is expensive, it costs us all millions, billions world-wide, yet it serves very little purpose other than as a stage for prancing bureaucrats, and VERY expensive ones at that. The UN is basically the Golden Trough and the feeding frenzy there is obscene, IMO.
In confrontational situations the UN is worse than useless, ask the survivors in Rwanda if you doubt that.
When you look at the UN spending the vast majority of it goes to supporting extravagant lifestyles for it's "officers", and they quite literally waste the majority of the rest. The UN was born of a good Ideal, but it was doomed from the start, Idealism carries little weight with the Baddies of this world.
The various pronouncements of the UN have actually caused Australia more problems than anything else, just look at refugees if you want an example.
So, I ask, should we cancel our membership, stop throwing money away on it?
It's not as if we would suffer at all, we wouldn't lose any friends, we wouldn't be penalised in any real way, no-ones going to declare war on us for leaving, are they

Dear Bruce,

The United Nations provides a forum for world opinion and a
mechanism for conflict resolution. There are international
laws that specify the rights and obligations that nations
have toward one another - particularly with respect to
aggression.

Over the years, the United Nations has intervened successfully
in a number of wars (in Korea for example) and in several
situations that might have led to war (Cuba, Berlin).

A major difficulty with international peace-making of course
is that compliance with the resolutions of the United Nations
and the rulings of its World Court are voluntary, for no
country is willing to surrender its sovereignty to an
international body.

The United Nations is most effective,
when the superpowerare able to agree
on a course of action and mobilise their blocs to
support it.

Even so, the organisation provides an influential forum
for world opinion, and while it does not always prevent war,
it surely helps make it less likely.

I'm with you there Bruce, but I was thinking of Kosovo when deciding it's usefulness.

Foxy the problem is that the UN is controlled by the tin pot minor dictators. That forum you see as useful I see as useful only to delay any action that we should be taking.

If it had been up to the UN the people of Kosovo would still be suffering. How many died while the talkfest at the UN was waffling along? It would be in the tens of thousands.

The UN is not only nonproductive, it has in fact proved counterproductive in every emergency since the Korean war. Surely that is long enough to judge it's usefulness, & decide it has absolutely none.

Foxy, do you really believe that without the UN as a stage none of the statements, deals or arrangements would happen?
Leaders would still release their pronouncements and the media would still spread it, countries would still talk to each other publicly and privately, alliances made and broken, the only difference would be no-one would be raking billions out of the world economy to do so.
Bear in mind we're talking about an organisation that has an annual headquarters budget running into BILLIONS per year, of which Oz contributes over $20,000,000 pa,and that's just to keep the NY boys n girls in the style to which they've chosen to become accustomed.
Every time they then choose to become involved in a situation they immediately put their hands out again, and the bill is always inflated by their "operating costs".
Despite the reiteration of the Ideal by Foxy I must ask, are we getting value for money?
Simple answer? NO.

Dear Hasbeen and Bruce,

An important element in any peace process is the
international community and its mechanisms for
restraining conflict among its members.
Trade, travel, and telecommunications have made
the nations of the modern world more interdependent
than ever before. Yet today's societies entered the
nuclear age with political institutions inherited
from a previous era. The human population is spread
among a series of sovereign independent states -
most ot them with their own armed forces - and so
there is a built in potential for warfare whenever
two nations have conflicting interests.

In the past, actually before the twentieth century there
were few institutionalised ways for hostile nations
to achieve peaceful settlements. When negotiations
took place, they often occurred only after a war - for
the purpose of agreeing to a peace treaty that would
specify the spoils for the victor.

Although the structure of international peace-making
may still be rudimentary, it now offers infinitely better
prospects for helping nations avoid war.

Particularly in a world where all nations face a common
threat of direct or indirect involvement in
nuclear warfare, some reliable method is needed to limit
conflicts among sovereign states.

As I stated in my previous post - the United Nations does
provide a forum for world opinion and a mechanism for
conflict resolution. In my opinion, while that does
not always prevent war - it surely helps make it less
likely

The UN a "forum for world opinion"? If that were the case we would get the chance to vote for them but we don't do we?

Progressives see democracy as optional!

Dear spindoc,

You need to be more specific.

Which "Progressives" are those exactly?

Or is that simply what you feel "Regressives" think?

Foxy, "Which "Progressives" are those exactly?"

That is a classic from the poster who along with some other prolific-posting leftist experts on OLO hotly denied and refused to believe that the Fabians aka 'Progressives', aka International Socialists even existed.

Recently one of OLO's leftist political experts, who now dons 'Progressivism' as his own notwithstanding that he disputed its existence before, declared that 'Progressive' was a recent development and said 'NO!, definitely it couldn't go back decades'. Honestly, didn't these experts on left and Labor ever listen to Gough Whitlam and other Labor leaders including ex-PM Julia Whatshername who is presently revising history?

The old Lefties would be turning in their graves while these clueless egocentric posters strut their opinions as Left. Left? They wouldn't recognise Left with a luminous road sign directing them. Most are just middle class hipsters with an over-developed sense of their own entitlement.

"Which 'Progressives'?", say what? Priceless.

My question still stands Foxy, is it value for money?
Billions upon billions of dollars for a talkfest that achieves very little in real terms?
The Ideals you espouse are just that, Ideals, not reality yet, if ever, if possible.
I ask again also, what good has membership of the UN ever done for Australia?
We've shelled out $Billions, sent our boys off to be killed and wounded, forked out yet more $Billions to prop up various highly suspect governments and had our own legal system rebuilt to suit other nations and do-gooders, to what end?
Yep, lots of oxygen-thief bureaucrats have made fortunes and lived the life of Riley on our money, and an ever-growing pool of rich monkeys is about all we have to show for all that money and suffering across the years.
If "economic realism" is the driving factor in all areas of government expenditure as proclaimed, why not apply a little to this wasteful, extravagant and highly expensive white-elephant!

Hi Bruce,

Perhaps the following two links will clarify things
for you:

1) http://www.dfat.gov.au/un

2) http://www.dfat.gov.au/aib/australia-and-the-world.html

The UN is merely a massively larger version of the Australian Public Service. So, you still think it's value for money ?

Dear Individual,

Have you read the two links I gave?

Have you read the two links I gave?
Foxy,
No, I'm too old for fairytales. I have heard & seen enough from the UN to realise no link can make them look any better. My brother was a lowly volunteer worker in the UN, he had to get out because he couldn't stand the incompetence & misuse of money anymore.

Dear Individual,

That's a shame - because the links are from the
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and explain
things which need to be read in order to
get the full picture. But of course it's a personal
ethos that one lives by. If you're happy
with only the perspective that you've already
obviously formed on the subject,
than there's nothing more to be said.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Foxy,
with all the possible respect due, do you really believe these Departments are in any way more competent than the UN ? Don't you read the News ? Don't you see bungles ? They are all career bureaucrats, they can't do what's good for the country, it's not in a bureaucrat's make-up.
The worst kind of characters are those bleeding hearts who grab any opportunity to make a personal gain by ignoring their responsibilities & the needs of others. That's why we can't take any of their statistics etc serious. There's no integrity involved.

Dear Individual,

Read the two links and then you'll be in a better
position to comment. At present all you have is
your own prejudices and bias - not actual
knowledge to make intelligent arguments.

foxy,
I just glanced over these reports & gee, they would make any ignorant Leftie proud. What has come of all the effort & expenses ? What do you see that most of us working people can't make out ? All i see is problems left, right & centre & not getting better. Our economy is so shot that even BHP is laying off 700 workers. I bet no bureaucrats will be out of work by Christmas.
What about Syria ? Ukraine ? What has the UN done with the billions handed to it ? I know, they're all "deeply concerned". Wow ! That does make me feel better.

Dear Individual,

All you seem to see is negativity.
I have no control over that.
The UN is certainly not perfect. - However
rather than knocking it - ask yourself -

Is there another institution that brings together
all the countries of the world to work together for
common objectives in all our collective interests?

The United Nations may not be perfect - but clearly
it would help to look at its history, achievements
to date, and its effectiveness thus far, especially
its humanitarian work - from
its peacekeeping missions worldwide, to its
leadership in the fight against HIV/Aids, to its
continued efforts to monitor and supervise free and
fair elections, to its Security Council, International
Court of Justice, and so on.

Unerstanding why the United Nations was founded and why
it attracts so many nations - might also help to get a
clearer picture of its purpose.

Anyway, it's up to you if you're interested to learn
more, if not, fair enough.

I shall leave you to it.

cont'd ...

Before I go - the following link may
help. It shows 60 ways in which the
UN makes a difference.
Just click onto the various headings
on the left once you get into the link:

http://www.un.org/un60/60ways/

its peacekeeping missions worldwide, to its
leadership in the fight against HIV/Aids, to its
continued efforts to monitor and supervise free and
fair elections, to its Security Council, International
Court of Justice, and so on.
Foxy,
I wouldn't call it success by the looks of it. We have Departments of Justice , law etc but where is the evidence of it all working ?
Peace keeping does nothing more than give breathing space to the bad & the fight against HIV/Aids does nothing more than go against Nature's population control mechanism. Doing good is wrong, doing right is way more effective & better for mankind. Trouble is that too many educated "experts" don't have a clue.

Dear Individual,

It's not only the educated "experts" who don't have
a clue.

Cheers.

It's not only the educated "experts" who don't have
a clue.
foxy,
I wholeheartedly agree however, the not so educated don't frequent the decision maker circles.

Dear Individual,

Take a good look at many of our current politicians.
Many people would not agree with your take
on things in that regard. Voters are not happy.

Foxy,
they're not happy because of the mess we are in courtesy of Labor. If you expect the Coalition to sort all this absurd & criminal inheritance out in one term then you really have rather unrealistic expectations.

Dear Individual,

Eureka! Blaming Labor is the political tactic
of the current government
and now you're singing from the same song-book
What do you know!

Foxy,
So, who would you blame for the mess Australia was in when Labor was booted out ?

There was no "mess".

"Joe Hockey has told New Zealand that there is no crisis in the Australian economy, nor is it in trouble.

The treasurer also made no mention of the "budget emergency" he and his government referred to when justifying their unpopular budget to Australians.

Instead, Mr Hockey reassured Kiwis that their second biggest trading partner is benefiting from 23 years of consecutive economic growth.

"The Australian economy is not in trouble," he told New Zealand political current affairs show The Nation on Saturday."

"There's no crisis at all in the Australian economy," the treasurer said."

http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australian-economy-is-not-in-trouble-joe-hockey-tells-nz-20140726-zx6ie.html#ixzz3EGseiBtz

Or do you reckon Joe was "lying" to New Zealanders?

There was no "mess"
Poirot,
where I live & most others I speak with there is a big mess both in Government Departments & breaking down of communities. actually, there is no point in arguing with because you'll never admit it even if you were at the receiving end. That's just the way you Lefties are. Reality is to be disputed at all cost. You should see what our communities in the North go through. Jobs slashed to below bare minimum. No projects in the forseeable future to provide employment for workers. Yes, there are plenty of Dollars available for Labor supporting bureaucrats & their Consultant mates but nothing for the people who reside in the communities. I'd call that a "mess" any day !

Dear Individual,

Well you should be really happy now with
the current government in power.
They'll fix everything for you
and make it right.

No worries.

No worries.
Foxy,
It'll be no worries for me when the Labor Party has dissolved & the Greens are dead & gone.
I can then focus on keeping the Coalition on track.

Dear Individual,

We all have our fantasies.

Mine is that I'm admired for my brain
rather than my looks.

Mine is that I'm admired for my brain
rather than my looks.
Foxy,
So am I but only by normal people rather than fairytale academics.

Dear Individual,

I guess that depends on your definition of "normal."

I strongly believe that folk and fairy tales contribute
to the mental health of children: for too little
fantasy in their lives is worse than too much. It's
impossible to rid childhood of the dragons of dread,
but it is worse to kill St George and to deprive children
of a hero figure to serve as a model of behaviour.

But enough said.
I don't want to preach.

Dear Jay,

Give us the link.

I'm having trouble finding it.