Do you believe that there should be a UNited Nations?

Question

PLease answer this, and explain why you believe so! Thanks! If you have more information and websites of info on it, you can email me at [e-mail]. Thanks!

Answer 1

Yes but without U.S.

Answer 2

It doesn't seem like the UN has contributed much to the world.

It is admirable to promote better agriculture and health, but coupling it with a pseudo-legislative body seems counter-productive.  It's a forum for political struggles that reflects the personal ambitions of world leaders more than giving voice to nations.

Probably the best mechanism for giving the poor a voice is to reach them economically, and that requires that they break the corrupt ruling families out of power. I don't think the UN has helped with that process at all.

Answer 3

The UN is just a forum for discussion. Only the UN Security Council has any power, and it's controlled by just a handful of nations (the USA, Russia, China, France and England). I think that's wrong -- I think the Security Council should be expanded to include the country's with the largest economies and that make the largest contributions to the UN per capita (that includes Germany, Japan, Brazil, and India for sure).

The UN General Assembly and individual committees provide platforms for dialogue, and there's no alternative being offered for such -- but I think the work of these committees should be more transparent.

The UN member agencies (UNDP, UNICEF, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNFPA, etc.) are often the bandaid holding things together in various parts of the world; these should be better funded, the human resources management at these agencies should be VASTLY improved, they should work more through local NGOs and local institutions, and they should all provide more opportunities for the general public to see their work first hand.

I think the UN Peace-Keeping program should be done away with, because too many countries have soldiers that abuse women and children under this program, and then hide under the UN banner in order to avoid scrutiny or punishment. Military action could still be undertaken under the UN Security Council, but with each country negotiated with individually, and no way to hide behind the UN banner for inappropriate conduct -- offending soldiers would be fully identified by the country they represent, rather than being called "UN PeaceKeepers," which is misleading, as the UN has no standing military (and shouldn't have such).

Answer 4

Other countries should be able to do as they please. However, America should not relinquish it's sovereignty to a world governing body and subject it's citizens to a governing body that the people did not elect themselves. In fact, that would be unconstitutional.

Answer 5

yes

Answer 6

The current United Nations is a Useless Nothing. Yes, we need a new UN with clear agenda to serve the world.

Answer 7

nope, because power should be a check to power, i believe countries should always exist because if one country has a crazy dictator and is trying to take over the world, other countries can step in and fight the crazy guy and end his rampage, but if theres a nationless world where there is only 1 government, if that government goes evil and corrupt, it would be very hard to stop it because theres no other countries, so you would have to rebel from within

having a nationless world would be ideal, but not practical because there always has been, and always will be people who want and are trying to takover the world

Answer 8

no

Answer 9

yes we need united nations it good and it keep peace around the world but we don't need those country ,using power to control all nations.using(veto) that is not cool,veto should be to each country are member of united nation have the right to get that (veto) and they can use it when some thing is not right.