The debate "The UN needs to be more powerful and used to oversee the world's countries" was started by
March 11, 2017, 9:25 pm.
8 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 4 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
blue_rayy posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 1 argument, historybuff posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
Pugsly, blue_rayy, roopa, EthanTReilly and 4 visitors agree.
historybuff, human and 2 visitors disagree.
it has permanent observer status.
I was just picking the smallest country in the world to highlight my point. that kind of system would give undue power to small states like the Vatican, if not the Vatican specifically.
LMAO, historybuff..... Vatican isnt a UN recognised country.
The US, China and Russia would never allow an international organization that they couldn't veto.
and how exactly would such an organization work? would you vote by population like a democracy? in which case China and India would run it.
do you give one nation one vote? this would give huge influence to alliances of small countries. you could have a tiny fraction of the world's population dictating to the rest of the world. the Vatican would be equal to the US.
the problem is, without the veto power, the big, powerful countries would never join it and the whole organization would be worthless if the big shots stay out. instead of a world peace organization it will just be a one sided alliance like Nato.
it should monitor all the 193 countries and shouldnt favour any country. It should listen to all equally. As i've said before, It should also maintain its independent armed forces. The veto system should be removed. Because Russia would oppose America and America would oppose Russia.
The UN should be the law for all countries. for example, court is a place for justice.
I would say they definitely need to do more. it's part of the reason America gets in is because we see a problem we want to fix it. it might make everyone happier if the UN did more. but on US doing stuff early is bad/good that is for a different debate.
the UN was broken from its inception. the big 5 built their vetos into it and have the organization no teeth. the UN can whine and complain, but in the end they are powerless to do anything. and even if they could, with the US, China and Russia holding vetos to everything, they wouldn't be able to get anything done.