Dismantle the UN????????????

[Captain Sensible]

I was reading on The Huffington Post of McCains secret plan to do away with the UN and replace it with a league of democracies.
Seeing as we pay almost 25% of the UN budget and get nothing but resolutions bashing America mealy mouthed resolution with no enforcement and there are states like Cuba and Libya on its human rights councils does anyone else here think it might be an idea worth looking at?

[shadowknows69]

1. Sure, as long as the US is bound by every law and treaty that every other member is

Including war criminal prosecution.

[Captain Sensible]

6. Of course..

and every other state would be required to abide by equal rights for women and minorities etc.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. I heard that this country hasn't paid its dues to the UN for years.

Is that true?

[Romulox]

26. Ummm, no. nt

[Winterblues]

28. Ted Turner gave One billion dollars to pay US dues to UN

One hundred million a year for ten years because the Republicans would not pay our dues.

[Romulox]

34. No. The $1 billion was to establish a charitable foundation.

He did pay $34 million in arrearages in 2000, however.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/docs00/cros1223.htm

[Winterblues]

36. Not my understanding at all

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE0D91E38F93AA2575AC0A961958260

Ted Turner, the billionaire founder of Cable News Network, who has made a career out of defying expectations and shocking the public, announced last night that he is making a gift of $1 billion to benefit the United Nations, one of the largest single donations ever.

<snip>

In a speech laced with the brashness that is his trademark, Mr. Turner said the gift, to be given over 10 years, represented just the increase in his net worth since the beginning of this year, and he called on other wealthy business people to follow his example.

He also urged the United States Government to pay the $1.5 billion it owes in back dues to the United Nations -- an issue that has become a political lightning rod among critics of the organization.

[Romulox]

40. The article you quote makes it clear that Turner was making a separate gift

Read it again.

[Romulox]

27. Ummm, no. nt

[gatorboy]

30. Ummmm, yes.

:eyes:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-04-09-dues_N.htm

Isn't that just like conservatives?:P

[Romulox]

33. From your own article:

"Nearly $160 million is owed for U.N. peacekeeping on obligations dating to 2005, the data show, and that is likely to grow to $266 million this year.

Since early 2007, the United States also has fallen into arrears of $51 million in dues to the regular U.N. budget — the first time it hasn't paid all yearly dues in a decade. The rest of the debt is owed to smaller groups, such as the International Labor Organization."

[gatorboy]

35. Ummmmm, and?

You made my point for me. Thanks!

[Romulox]

39. "the first time it hasn't paid all yearly dues in a decade."

The post I responded to asserted: "I heard that this country hasn't paid its dues to the UN for years."

[sinkingfeeling]

3. No. But doing away with the UN has been a high-priority item of the NeoCon GOP for decades.

The USA has done everything within its power to undermine the UN. It's only useful when we want some resolution against Iraq, Iran, North Korea, etc. We have a perfect record of vetoing any resolution against Israel and would never allow a Security Council resolution against ourselves.

Yes, the US hasn't paid its dues for years. And did you know that the General Assembly (170 countries) did condemn the invasion of Iraq?


Edited for additional comment.

[gatorboy]

4. League of Democracies? Where do the Wonder Twins fit in?

You have a list of the "League of Democracies"?

[Captain Sensible]

9. No. It was just listed on Huff Po. nt

[gatorboy]

13. Might wanna start looking into it then.

How good an idea can it be if you don't know what he's talking about?

[blm]

5. This gets raised in every election year by the GOP dirty tricksters. It's to energize the far right

to stay with the GOP instead of voting for a Constitution party candidate or a Bob Barr.

[RB TexLa]

7. Dream of both the left and right of the NeoKnowKnothing/Isolationists

[Captain Sensible]

14. It's not isolationist....

to make over the Un into a functioning body that backs up resolutions and does or does not pursue courses of action based on which members of the security council have trade agreements with which countries. i.e China blocking action in Darfur.

[countingbluecars]

8. That was the Bush-Bolton agenda.

I am not surprised that McCain agrees.

[godai]

10. So, China, Russia wouldn't be in this 'league of democracies'?

I'm sure this polls well, just like 'drill here, drill now' but such a drastic proposal, during a Presidential campaign, is pure politics. The US NEVER agrees with the UN? Seems that Condi is always referring to UN resolution x. The UN office was blown up while they were trying to do some good in Iraq. There's a lot that the UN does to fight poverty, AIDS etc. But, this could have Obama defending the UN, if he goes against such a trial balloon, followed by commercials mocking him further.

[malaise]

11. Who defines democracies here - the fascist right wing led by Bush?

Worst idea ever. This planet needs a balance of power not a league of fascists.

[Captain Sensible]

16. No..

If you check your calendar he will ge gone by Jan.
Probably start with the most obvious member states UK France Germany Us etc and go from there.
Its not my idea but I do think the UN needs some reworking.

[The Stranger]

20. Please just stop.

Please. Learn more about the Neoconservative agenda, its power in the Rightist Republican think tanks, its ability to bully and subdue Democrats, and what you are dealing with.

Dismantling the UN is the singlemost fucking worst idea ever seriouisly proposed here. I don't even know where to begin.

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. Oh, he knows the neocon agenda.

That's why he's pushing it.

[atreides1]

12. No

A League of Democracies, like those democracies that employ the use of paramilitaries or mercenaries, democracies that use torture,
democracies that are nothing more then Police State lite?

Those democracies?

No thanks I'll continue to take my chances with the UN.

[wtmusic]

15. An idea worth looking at????????????

Who created the UN, then started bashing it when it held its creator to its own standards? What has the UN done to help enforcement, despite defy the very
resolutions its required to uphold?

[supernova]

17. This has been a High Holy of the GOP for decades

get rid of the UN. Just about ever since it was created. They didn't like Wilson's League of Nations, either.

They equate our creation of and participation in the UN as an abdication of national sovereignty. Whatch, anytime we have a national discussion about us needing to pay past dues, or participate more, the right squeals like stuck pigs that we ought to leave the UN.

[Trajan]

18. The John Birch Society promoted this for years ...

In their inimitable, big, front yard signs declaring 'OUT OF THE UN!' and other such ostentatious displays ...

So ... You support this idea ?

How about trying to make the UN better instead ?

[merh]

19. And Cuba and Libya and the rest of the world

finds it appalling that the US is on the human rights council. The resolutions bashing America are appropriate given America's positions over the last 7 years.

I don't think doing away with the UN is the answer, I think abiding by treaties is a requirement and it is just one of hundreds of abuses of office by this administration. Prosecute the criminals.

[Oilwellian]

21. Oh really?

All we get from the UN are "resolutions bashing America?" Hmmm, where have I heard that before? Insofar as Cuba & Libya on the Human Rights Council....members on the UN Councils are rotated. Perhaps we'll be on the Human Rights Council next year. Won't that be a hoot? :eyes:

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. Good explanation here why McCain's plan is a pile of crap

Via this thread here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3829680

The League would not even live up to its limited pro-democracy billing. If you study McCain's foreign policy statements, you find that for him "democracy" doesn't mean a free and openly elected leader. No: it means a leader who supports US demands.

You can see this if you compare McCain's reactions over the past fortnight to two different separatist movements: in Georgia and Bolivia. When it comes to Georgia, he says it is obscene for South Ossetians to secede from a country they never felt part of, and have never been directly ruled by. He orders the people there to decline the support of the foul Putin regime next door and remain glued to the government of Georgia, against their will, for the sake of keeping the country together. However, when it comes to Bolivia, he actively encourages separatism. The Bush administration – with McCain's support – has been lavishing cash on separatists in the gas-rich regions of this South American country in the hope that they will declare independence.

Why does McCain think separatism is "evil" in one part of the world, and "necessary" in the other? The answer lies in the ground. In Georgia, the democratic-but-dissident-bashing government lets the US control the oil and gas that pass through. In Bolivia, the impeccably democratic government of Evo Morales wants to control it on their own. Morales is asking US gas companies to pay their fair share, and using the proceeds to lift his own people out of poverty. For that, he is dubbed "authoritarian".

So there's McCain's definition of democracy: if you let us control your resources, you're a democracy. If you try to control your resources yourself, you're a dictatorship. Those of us who believe democracy is the most precious political value of all should be repelled to see it reduced to a propaganda term.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-john-mccain-and-his-secretive-plot-to-kill-the-un-903998.html

[sourmilk]

23. Just remove the VETO power.

United States, Russia, the People's Republic of China, France and the United Kingdom should NOT be the world's arbiters via UNSC veto, since they are also the world's leading arms manufacturers.

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. A set up to WW3.

A "league of democracies" would re-polarize the world into an 'us' and 'them', and the inevitable outcome would be worldwide conflagration.

You stop wars by talking to people, not by isolating them.

All the education, civil rights, environmental, etc. initiatives from the UN are nice, but the base purpose of the UN is to limit international conflicts by talking to each other.

Who would be in this "league of democracies"? Would WE? A number of democratic nations no longer see the US as a true democracy, with its unaccountable electoral system and aggressive foreign policy. Of course, they don't openly say so because WE SCARE THEM.

There are things about the UN that could stand fixing, but that's true of any organization. Scrapping it will have the same beneficent results as scrapping the League of Nations did in the 30s.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

29. He goes too far, but the UN desperately needs reform.

It's incredibly wasteful - it recently paid me to do work I was in no way qualified to do, with no scrutiny (one of my friends' mothers is an eminent sociologist running a project; it emerged that no-one on her project new anything about analyising data; I don't know much about it either but am at least numerate, and I did it as a favour for her).

Also, the fact that Russia and China sit on its security council makes it toothless and of very limited value.

I think that some form of middle ground between US unilateralism and giving those two states a veto on humanitarian interventions is a very good idea, but I don't think the US should withdraw from the UN entirely.

I do think that UN approval is essentially meaningless, and whether or not it's received should not be a major factor when deciding whether a war or other action was justified or not. The invasion of Iraq was wrong, *and* it was illegal, but it wasn't any wronger *because* it was illegal.

[The2ndWheel]

31. The problem with the UN is that it isn't actually united

Which is why the US taxpayer is on the hook for the global military, and also why the US Government can go anywhere it chooses to go militarily. Nobody listens to the UN now, imagine what would happen if it didn't have the US military backing it up in some fashion.

If we're going to go global institutions, then everybody has to pay for it, and it will include a military, because it is built into the way we structure society. That means Europe has to provide not only more money but more people, same with China, India, Brazil, Pakistan, Russia, etc, etc, etc. There can't be individual governments either, since they all run according to their own interests. The US Government cannot be allowed to not sign international treaties, for climate change or not. China can't not do what it wants if it goes against the grain. If you want to regulate global corporations, then you need a global infrastructure for government to regulate them. You can't have the Chinese government willing to not have worker or environmental rights. They can't be allowed to do so if we want a global world(or the US can't be allowed to have those rights, either way), end of story. There has to be a single way of running the show. Too many cooks in the kitchen and all that jazz.

Again, the reason the UN doesn't work is that there is too much diversity in terms of governments/nations/countries. That's why global corporations have so much power. They exist in the 21st century. Government exists, at best, in the 20th. If you want the UN to work, you have to actually unite the nations.

[LanternWaste]

32. Dues from each member nation are based on that nation's GDP

"Seeing as we pay almost 25% of the UN budget..."

Dues from each member nation are based on that nation's GDP. So while the U.S. may pay out more in absolute terms, it's still a fairly equal apportionment. Also, there is a ceiling rate that no member nation may pay above and beyond, and a floor rate that each member nation must pay at least the equivalent of.


I like to call that concept "paying your fair share".

[Cleita]

37. That has been the wet dream of the neo-cons since practically its

inception. I don't think it's a good idea unless something better replaces it. If it does, I hope it's not headquartered in this country. We interfere too much and a global group of nations needs autonomy from us.

[Igel]

38. Yes, no, maybe.

The idea's been bandied about for the last 6 months in tha campaign. It was a Big Deal back in late May and early June.

Not recently. I guess that makes it a "secret", as though Google doesn't exist.

JM was in favor of it; never saw him or an advisor say it would replace the UN. Usually billed as "UN + League".

BO had no great comment, or none that I noticed when the issue was in the media. One of his advisors spoke out in favor of the idea (Anthony Lake, don't know if he's still an advisor or not); and another, Ivo Daadler (still an advisor in early July), had a similar kind of plan.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/gwtardy/gGByPX

It's a non-starter. Sounds good, but won't fly anywhere.

[LSK]

41. HELL NO

Typical of right wingers, they just want to destroy Govt institutions instead of fixing problems within them. Why not just work to fix them.

Dont give me that BULLSHIT about paying 25% of the UN budget because all the ensuing wars from a lack of UN would be much more costly.

[Iggo]

42. This hasn't sunk yet?

Wait a minute.

D'oh!