A rare moment of clarity from you. NATO is more relevant than the UN is now.
Ukraine’s Zelensky Calls for Removing Russia From U.N.
- Thread starter Jack
- Start date
A rare moment of clarity from you. NATO is more relevant than the UN is now.
Do you think UN Blue Helmets could be useful in Ukraine right now? Humanitarian Corridor?
Or, would it be better to use American 82nd Airborne?
evince
Truthmatters
ExpressLane
Verified User
The UK did more to defeat Germany than China did.
Maybe but I doubt it.
Definitely would be more effective but that's taking a chance on escalation.
Nomad
Verified User
Hiroshima is hardly comparable.
Japan attacked us at Pearl Harbor which pulled us into WWII.
When we dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, we ended the war and saved untold numbers of lives.
Russia is just engaged in a blatant land grab.
If I could save all the kids and hot young Russian chicks, I'd make that concession.
"The US has admitted that a drone strike in Kabul days before its military pullout killed 10 innocent people.
A US Central Command investigation found that an aid worker and nine members of his family, including seven children, died in the 29 August strike.
The youngest child, Sumaya, was just two years old."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58604655
You know War is about killing people, right?
The UN can be effective as needed.
Yes. We DON'T want to ESCALATE the War with US Troops.
Nomad
Verified User
Once again, not comparable.
The US drone strike was an accident.
The Russian soldiers are intentionally murdering civilians by the THOUSANDS.
Oh come on, man.
That is beneath you.
War is about killing other countries' soldiers, not raping, torturing, mutilating and massacring women and children.
Why are you trying to play apologist for Putin?
I'm trying to separate 'Putin' from 'Russia'.
I'm all for eliminating Putin.
The Russian People can be forgiven (maybe not by Ukraine).
Better a UN than no UN. At least there is a place to state your case in front of the world.
True.
I am not against the UN.
But the Security Council has to go.
That 5 countries can do anything they want - without any military action from the UN - is ludicrous.
It was like the WW2 'Victors' set up the Rules.
I don't know that much about it, but you'd think there would be some mechanism to 'change' as time went by.
"The G7 (Group of Seven) is an organisation of the world's seven largest so-called "advanced" economies, which dominate global trade and the international financial system. They are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK and the United States."
I'd like to see Japan get a more prominent role.
The problem is that I highly doubt any of the five will want to give up their lofty positions without something HUGE in return.
It's hard to give up a 'Get Out Of Jail Free for EVERYTHING, ALWAYS' Card...even for Boardwalk and 3 Railroads.
I don't know what the 'Rules' are. Maybe expand the '5 Permanent Members' to 6? Or 7?
Nomad
Verified User
The Russian soldiers who are doing this shit are also part of the Russian people.
They didn't just turn barbaric after becoming soldiers.
That has to be part of who they've always been.
moon
Satire for Sanity
After America's excesses there are considerably fewer nations to attack than there were.
The veto is, as you say , ridiculous. There is a General Assembly mechanism to overturn vetos though- ( UNGAR 377 of 1950 ) although it would take , I believe, two-thirds of them with guts to implement it.
America has attacked nations. That hopefully is over with Dems in power. But Putin has done it before and will do it again. He is who this thread is about.