How to give the UN teeth?

[Machjo]

I would let them consult on identifying the colour of the sky.

So via what other venue would democratic countries and non-democratic ones exchange ideas? Nukes?

 

[Colpy]

Then what about some kind of World Federation of Democracies, which would welcome all nations that meet its minimum human rights standards (perhaps based on the current Universal Declaration of Human Rights), which would share such a force, and whose membership would be elected, either directly by the people, or at a minimum by national government that themselves have been elected by their people, or something of the sort. But otherwise keep the same principle of a maximum of 100,00 well trained and equipped men.

The UN would still exist but only as a consultative organization.

Personally, I always though that a close economic and military alliance among the English-speaking democracies would be an excellent idea.......the USA, India, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand.......

But I doubt the political climate is right for any of that......Pakistan and China would have absolute fits about a new, powerful military alliance in Asia........the Europeans would freak about GB moving economically outside the EU.........

Anyway, I digress...I think your idea has more merit than any of arming the UN....but I think we are stuck with the old UN, sans teeth.......for much the same reasons as I outlined above about a union of English-speaking democracies......those that are excluded would go off to their rooms and sulk, and that is NOT a good thing for peace in the world.

Divisive as opposed to unifying......

 

[CDNBear]

So via what other venue would democratic countries and non-democratic ones exchange ideas? Nukes?

Ya, let's jump right to nukes...:roll:

Obviously reasoned debate is not what you're looking for.

 

[Machjo]

Or another question is who decides on international laws of military engagement? Is it preferable to just have an international free for all, anarchy; or some kind of legitimate organization that can define the rules of engagement so as to ensure countries, including democracies, don't go off on imperialistic ventures.

Let's not forget that even the British Empire and the French Empire were built by democratic or at least semi-democratic countries of the time. And let's not forget the US empire that had occupied the Philippines and other countries too.

Ya, let's jump right to nukes...:roll:

Obviously reasoned debate is not what you're looking for.

So what would you propose if we scrapped the UN as a consultative venue?

And Colpie, I don't see why we do not in fact strengthen our ties with the Commonwealth into something more than just a friendly club. That would be a good start, though of course it would have to go hand in hand with strengthening the Francophonie too.

 

[CDNBear]

Or another question is who decides on international laws of military engagement? Is it preferable to just have an international free for all, anarchy; or some kind of legitimate organization that can define the rules of engagement so as to ensure countries, including democracies, don't go off on imperialistic ventures.

:roll:

This is why so many of you jump to sudden uninformed conclusions as to the legality of acts committed in conflicts. You haven't clue one that there are standardized international treaties, conventions and laws, that many of the nations of the world have already signed.

There really is no need for a singular body in that regard.

So what would you propose if we scrapped the UN as a consultative venue?

Something similar to the UN, without the bullsh!t.

And Colpie, I don't see why we do not in fact strengthen our ties with the Commonwealth into something more than just a friendly club. That would be a good start, though of course it would have to go hand in hand with strengthening the Francophonie too.

We're already a member of one, it's called the Commonwealth.

 

[wulfie68]

So via what other venue would democratic countries and non-democratic ones exchange ideas? Nukes?

Democratic and non-democratic countries still have the option of using their own national embassies and ambassadorial staffs to maintain diplomatic relationships should they desire them. The singular body of the UN is a bloated model of inefficiency, that has become so sidetracked by trying to avoid offending the national agendas of every member state, that nothing can be accomplished within it. With country-to-country diplomacy, they have an option of agreeing on a third party to mediate, should they be unable to find a solution between two parties.

 

[YukonJack]

Somebody here referred to the United Nations as a "consultative venue".

So want to consult with hell holes like Liberia? Senegal? Cuba? Venezuela? North Korea? China? etc... etc... etc...

 

[bobnoorduyn]

Let's not forget that even the British Empire and the French Empire were built by democratic or at least semi-democratic countries of the time.

Though some might argue that they were not in fact democracies, but monarchies/oligarchies at the time. It was in fact democracy that helped stem the tides, or at least slow their progress to global conquest.

If you wonder why democratic and non demoncratic countries cannot sit down together it is because those in power are loathe to relinqush it and regard those who apparently do as weak and not worth the steam off their p*ss. Such open tyarants aren't hard to miss, but it is the tyrant who can use the "voice of the people" under the guise of democracy to their own ends who we must be most wary of.

And let's not forget the US empire that had occupied the Philippines and other countries too.

And let's not forget the reason too. At the time the US was still a republic, (not an empire, like Japan), I can't say if it really still is.

 

[gerryh]

anything that smacks of a single world government would be tossed imediatley..... by both democratic counttries and dictatorships..... and single world government means individual leaders could lose their importance..... it could mean the real possibility of world peace....and we just can't be having that.