United Nations & Funding

[jimnyc]

I'm a bit out of of the loop on this one. I simply never followed a damn thing regarding funding. All I ever knew was that the headquarters was in NYC and I hated events there when I worked in the city as it would bring my trip home to a standstill.

But in addition to being the host country, we provide for 22 percent of their budget? Yikes. Also 28% of their peacekeeping budget, as per Wiki.

If it were up to me, I would toss out the headquarters. I would also come up with something where all those involved contribute equally. Or I would just defund them altogether.

What do you guys/gals think about no more of our money going to the UN? What are your thoughts on the UN just disappearing altogether? And what happens in this world if the UN simply ceases to exist anymore?

[Kathianne]

I think it should be in our past regarding membership. The UN doesn't serve our interests, NATO countries are more in line with our interests. Most of the members of the UN are our enemies, not so with NATO.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I'm a bit out of of the loop on this one. I simply never followed a damn thing regarding funding. All I ever knew was that the headquarters was in NYC and I hated events there when I worked in the city as it would bring my trip home to a standstill.

But in addition to being the host country, we provide for 22 percent of their budget? Yikes. Also 28% of their peacekeeping budget, as per Wiki.

If it were up to me, I would toss out the headquarters. I would also come up with something where all those involved contribute equally. Or I would just defund them altogether.

What do you guys/gals think about no more of our money going to the UN? What are your thoughts on the UN just disappearing altogether? And what happens in this world if the UN simply ceases to exist anymore?
As I've stated repeatedly, the damn UN works against us about 90% of time and why should we shoulder the greatest burden of its cost while also hosting its headquarters here .
Dump it, add to NATO as a countermeasure!
WHY SHOULD WE CONTINUE TO FUND AN ORGANIZATION THAT REPEATEDLY WORKS TO HELP OUR ENEMIES!
ITS INSANITY IMHO..

An Example-


https://www.yahoo.com/news/un-demands-end-israeli-settlements-us-abstains-193027638.html

[Gunny]

I'm a bit out of of the loop on this one. I simply never followed a damn thing regarding funding. All I ever knew was that the headquarters was in NYC and I hated events there when I worked in the city as it would bring my trip home to a standstill.

But in addition to being the host country, we provide for 22 percent of their budget? Yikes. Also 28% of their peacekeeping budget, as per Wiki.

If it were up to me, I would toss out the headquarters. I would also come up with something where all those involved contribute equally. Or I would just defund them altogether.

What do you guys/gals think about no more of our money going to the UN? What are your thoughts on the UN just disappearing altogether? And what happens in this world if the UN simply ceases to exist anymore?
Well, put a nickel in the ride.:laugh:

Screw the Useless N. I agree with Kath and tyr ... dump their asses. Put the headquarters in Iraq. Bet all those pansies will rethink their chair polishing asses when under fire by a real enemy.

[Elessar]

Either cut back on funding or get of the UN completely.

Keep NATO, though. It is pretty vital to our interests.

[Gunny]

Either cut back on funding or get of the UN completely.

Keep NATO, though. It is pretty vital to our interests.

I would agree about NATO if they ever did anything. Last I noticed it's just another paper tiger. A DO blame a lot of that on our paper president.

[Elessar]

I would agree about NATO if they ever did anything. Last I noticed it's just another paper tiger. A DO blame a lot of that on our paper president.

I suppose like many other things, the CG's work with NATO benefits Search and Rescue, Drug Interdiction,
and illegal alien trafficking...

I say keep it...keep the Canadians and other nations on our side.

[aboutime]

Did anyone ever hear the expression "Keep your friends close, and your Enemies Closer?"

Though I despise the U.N. and almost everything, everyone has said about it here. If we force the U.N. to set up it's headquarters anywhere else, where WE lose sight of, and remain, Out of physical control. That, in effect, becomes "Cutting off our Noses, to Spite our Faces." Just my opinion, since most of what I say here means nothing to anyone else.

[Balu]

Initially the UN was conceived as a successor to the League of Nations, a place all the countries were able to negotiate and settle down all the arising questions to prevent the disputes between the countries transform into wars. For this provided for the creation of the international Peace Corps, known as blue helmets to be placed between arguing countries in case of urgency. Besides there was created a special structure Security Council - the only legitimate body which has been authorized to take decisions on military intervention in the internal affairs of other countries to solve their internal problems.
The idea itself was good, but it faced the problem of a 'block system', that appropriated the right to solve such problems bypassing the UN Bodies.
To say that the UN is ideal for solving the tasks enumerated above is to say wrong. But it is better than nothing.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Initially the UN was conceived as a successor to the League of Nations, a place all the countries were able to negotiate and settle down all the arising questions to prevent the disputes between the countries transform into wars. For this provided for the creation of the international Peace Corps, known as blue helmets to be placed between arguing countries in case of urgency. Besides there was created a special structure Security Council - the only legitimate body which has been authorized to take decisions on military intervention in the internal affairs of other countries to solve their internal problems.
The idea itself was good, but it faced the problem of a 'block system', that appropriated the right to solve such problems bypassing the UN Bodies.
To say that the UN is ideal for solving the tasks enumerated above is to say wrong. But it is better than nothing.

Perhaps at this point it is beter than nothing..
However, it is no longer efFective enough to judtify itsd costs to us IMHO.
AMERICA SHOULD KICK IT OUT OF OUR BORDERS AND ALREADY HAVE A BODY OF ALLIANCES TO COUNTER WHATS LEFT OF IT WITHOUT OUR MIGHT , POWERAND WEALRTH IMHO.
Yes, that would be a Herculean task but not impossible.
And it would serve this nation and the Western world's interests infinitely better methinks.

We had better find a way to undo the weaknesses that the obama deliberately created .-Tyr

[Balu]

Perhaps at this point it is beter than nothing..
However, it is no longer efFective enough to judtify itsd costs to us IMHO.
AMERICA SHOULD KICK IT OUT OF OUR BORDERS AND ALREADY HAVE A BODY OF ALLIANCES TO COUNTER WHATS LEFT OF IT WITHOUT OUR MIGHT , POWERAND WEALRTH IMHO.
Yes, that would be a Herculean task but not impossible.
And it would serve this nation and the Western world's interests infinitely better methinks.

We had better find a way to undo the weaknesses that the obama deliberately created .-Tyr
Historically it was reasonable that the UN was placed in the USA and namely in NY, as that time Europe was ruined after the World War II and Asia and Africa were the colonies of GB, France and Belgium. Besides NY is a port city and that time there were no transatlantic airlines. For example my gone father in law went to New York to work with the UN on Queen Marry from Cherbourg (France) and my gone wife attended the NY kindergarten for 4 years.
I don't know either it is reasonable or not to transfer the UN, say, to Geneva, as there already are some UN bodies, but I don't think that the USA are ready to loose a certain control over some countries. But to remain permanent control over anybody and anything is rather expensive thing.

[Elessar]

Historically it was reasonable that the UN was placed in the USA and namely in NY, as that time Europe was ruined after the World War II and Asia and Africa were the colonies of GB. Besides NY is a port city and that time there were no transatlantic airlines. For example my gone father in law went to New York to work with the UN on Queen Marry from Cherbourg (France) and my gone wife attended the NY kindergarten for 4 years.
I don't know either it is reasonable or not to transfer the UN, say, to Geneva, as there already are some UN bodies, but I don't think that the USA are ready to loose a certain control over some countries. But to remain permanent control over anybody and anything is rather expensive thing.

The UN was a fine concept, but without anything but paper arms and paper tigers.

UN fell apart during the Korean conflict. Member nations would not agree to unite. USSR and China were
behind the Communist push for power, and being permanent members of the Security Council, could block
any and all moves to prevent the conflict.

[Balu]

The UN was a fine concept, but without anything but paper arms and paper tigers.

UN fell apart during the Korean conflict. Member nations would not agree to unite. USSR and China were
behind the Communist push for power, and being permanent members of the Security Council, could block
any and all moves to prevent the conflict.
I've already said - the idea was good, but not ideal in presence of ideologically engaged military blocks guarding the interests of country groups. But, nevertheless it is better than nothing. Good or bad but a kind of a brake on the way to unbridled confrontation.

[Balu]

Donald J. Trump ‏<s>@</s>realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump)<small class="time"> </small>

The United Nations has such great potential but right now it is just a club for people to get together, talk and have a good time. So sad!


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump