Why are we in the UN?

[Zhukov]

There is no margin for error about a monstrosity that was created for the alleged purpose of preventing wars by uniting the world against any aggressor, but proceeded to unite it against any victim of aggression. The expulsion of a charter member, the Republic of China [Taiwan]—an action forbidden by the U.N.'s own Charter—was a 'moment of truth,' a naked display of the United Nations' soul.

What was Red China's qualification for membership in the U.N.? The fact that her government seized power by force, and has maintained it for twenty-two years by terror. What disqualified Nationalist China [Taiwan]? The fact that she was a friend of the United States. It was against the United States that all those beneficiaries of our foreign aid were voting at the U.N. It was hatred of the United States and the pleasure of spitting in our face that they were celebrating, as well as their liberation from morality—with savages, appropriately, doing jungle dances in the aisles.
— AYN RAND

There are 191 member states of the United Nations, with more than half of them run by dictators. Libya heads the Human Rights Commision and Syria is on the Security Council.

What is the point of remaining in the United Nations? Is it even morally right to remain? Why do so many on the left demand deference to the UN? Is it time to look beyond the UN and establish a Union of Democratic States?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Zhukov
There are 191 member states of the United Nations, with more than half of them run by dictators. Libya heads the Human Rights Commision and Syria is on the Security Council.

What is the point of remaining in the United Nations? Is it even morally right to remain? Why do so many on the left demand deference to the UN? Is it time to look beyond the UN and establish a Union of Democratic States?

Excellent questions. I'd like to hear some U.N.tards defend their cherished organization.

Anyone?

 

[Scourge]

you can talk about morals, and who you think deserves to be i the U.N. but we sponsor enough terrorism abroad to be held accountable to our OWN war on terror.
Plus, acting as we see fit is just taking the law into our own hands. Which is great if it's you who is doing it (because you KNOW you're right) but not so fun if it's your neighbors, or God forbid your enemies. If we were a tiny country with a tiny army I don't think unilateral action would sem so cool. And what's fair for the strong should be fair for the weak. Meaning, we should all abide by international law no matter how many military juggernauts threaten to invade us. lol. Anyhow, there are provisions for defending your country, we just never met any of those (it's hard if no country wants to attack you).

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Scourge
you can talk about morals, and who you think deserves to be i the U.N. but we sponsor enough terrorism abroad to be held accountable to our OWN war on terror.
Plus, acting as we see fit is just taking the law into our own hands. Which is great if it's you who is doing it (because you KNOW you're right) but not so fun if it's your neighbors, or God forbid your enemies. If we were a tiny country with a tiny army I don't think unilateral action would sem so cool. And what's fair for the strong should be fair for the weak. Meaning, we should all abide by international law no matter how many military juggernauts threaten to invade us. lol. Anyhow, there are provisions for defending your country, we just never met any of those (it's hard if no country wants to attack you).

All countries strive to protect their interest as best they can. Name one that doesn't. From that fairer perspective, we're no worse. Would you consider your attitude anti-american?