The In-Security Council: Dump it or Grow it?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

know your might!!
:-)

puyu`s point about making a start is exactly right. We are making some headway here.

and my proposal to dump the SC is a solution. So stuka`s comment comment about not offering solutions is lacking in substance.

A million petitions, sent by We the People, cannot be entirely ignored, even by that apathetic and self-preserving intergovernmental body.

Do some people here think that the UN is capable of undertaking significant structural internal reform.? Self-destructing their own jobs and perks?

If the UN Charter says ``We the People`` I am going to asume they mean me and you. So I am willing to take action to talk back.

I did not write this piece as hot air., and never waste my time at the watercooler. Maybe we can save some lives, put some of the money into the hands of women and children, cotton growers and milk producers, solar energy developers and windgenerators, who need it badly.

So if anyone wants to float a petition on Petitions on Line website, let me know. I notice some good writers here.

I will not be responding to any further posts. Thanks everybody, no matter what your position is on this topic.

Lastly, if you want to help you are welcome to send the article along with your comments to:

Fred Eckhard Annan`s Spokesperson
Shashi Tharoor Secretariat
Angela King Women

All bureaucrats., and no, I don`t hobnob with bureaucrats.

CKK

``and my proposal to dump the SC is a solution.``

Dump it and what? Like I said, it is one thing to tear down existing structures, another to propose alternatives.

``So stuka`s comment comment about not offering solutions is lacking in substance. ``

ummm, no. Actually your ``solution`` is...lacking in substance I mean..

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Arjun!!
as i said ,what if the vietnamese had resigned to the american might.
Surely, America was mightier in all conventional sense.
But Vietnam didnt buy it and thought how they could be mightier.
They didnt accept defeat APRIORI.
May be you/we dont realize your/our might!
Its disappointing that you dont believe in human spirit!

And as for the black civil movement it did win Kennedy`s support ,didnt it?
And it made a difference, didnt it?

#42
Unkalji, Israel probably sells more high-tech weapons than anyone else to the exclusion of perhasps the US and Russia. They also are rumored to have nukes which were tested for them by S. Africa. I don`t think anyone in his sane mind would say Israel is a world power. The reality is that if France or GB had gone to war unprovoked against a sovereign nation on invented reasons as the US recently did, there would be hell to pay. So, no, I don`t think they are world powers.
A broader point I think is that a world power ought to be willing to exercise that power. I don`t think China qualifies on this count.

arjun_m,
You are trying to shoehorn everything into this ``might is right`` thing. For example, you say civil rights was forced on the seggregationist states by the mighty federal government. That part is right. But which mighty entity got the federal government to come on the side of civil rights? Similarly, why did the mighty brits gave up on india? Might, as Puyu or someone else said, may mean different things, not necessarily military or enforcement power. I think the author is essentially right that the structure of the UN can be changed into a fairer arrangement but a million people signing petitions is unlikely to be that force of change. Millions of people marching all over the world didn`t prevent two crazies from starting a war...

I don`t understand why Indians are not content with one Gandhi and one Nehru. Why do we keep trying to produce more of them?

Gandhites and Nehruites, you played your part, did well in your time; now don`t hang around longer than you are welcome. Fade into history gracefully. History books will honor you. But in todays` world, you are out of date, out of place.

Indian Gandhites and Nehruvites have gotten greedy. They want all Gandhis and Nehrus to be born only in India.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Arjun!!

++
What would have happened if the US had nuked all of Vietnam?
++
Why didnt they do it?
It did have something to do with the moral might

The war is not won until its fought.
Before the war began the vietcongs didnt back out fearing the american might.
They fought cos they were fighting for a cause.
The advantages of the form of warfareand all that came later.


++
Like you`ve said, you aren`t going to get anywhere by million man marches or things like that..the answer to might is more might..doesn`t have to be military might..an oil embargo is a form of might in action...consumer boycotts are a form of might...
++
...moral might...then we dont have any disagreement.

re: Chithra Karunakaran

The idea of having two bodies General Assembly (with one vote per member) and Security Council (with five permanent members; and 10 rotating temporary members) presents a contradiction.

Why allow 5 countries to shoot down any resolution that they don`t like? USSR and USA used their veto power over the last 5 decades to perpetuate the Kashmir and Middle East problems. Perhaps we should have an even playing field in which a club of countries does not enjoy special priveleges.

But the biggest problem with UN is its lack of muscle. Without a standing army, the UN needs to rely on the Big Five (well primarily USA) to provide the muscle. This ultimately means that UN can only function as an appendix to USA. Incidentally, USA is not prepared to even implement an innocuous little UN Environmental Treaty (Kyoto). The less said about unpaid UN dues and resolutions on Israel, the better.

Fortunately, a large number of Americans especially democrats, Green Party, independents, civil rights groups, lawyers and liberals have criticized the neo-cons and extremist media for sidelining the UN. As the election draws near, we are sure to hear more jabs at Bush from democrats on this issue.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re. #47 Arjun_m:
I agree that there`s no point i nthrwoing hissy fits, which, admittedly some nations do. and that these nations need to strengthen their economies. However, protesting against an unjust system of trade that keeps ``lesser`` nations under the yoke of economic `opression` (for want of a better word) does not amount to a hissy fit. Hope you do dtaw the fine distinctions. Think `tarriffs`. Think `subsidies`.
re. ``This whole thing reminds me of the ``WAAH!!Bob down the halls makes more money than me`` whine.. ``
This much projection cannot be a good thing. :-) Really!!

re. arjun_m #54:
``Your proposal is just that..a proposal..not grounded in reality..You need to outline what you plan to do to get the US/UK etc to accept a UN without a SC and the veto power... ``
Here`s a start!