Page 5 of 18 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 256

Thread: Useless UN

  1. #61
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Actually,

    I can think of several more Generals in that regard

    French General Jean Cott
    British General Sir Michael Rose

    Both also of UNPROFOR

    I really admire what Indian Army General Jetley did in Sierra Leonne

    All, including MGen MacKenzie, initiated combat actions without asking New York.

  2. #62
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,723

    Post

    I have to laugh at the fact the U.N. believes we should shut down Gitmo.

    Yeah, they have really proven to make the best sound judgements concerning any kind of security about terrorism anywhere!

    Maybe they should start to worry about security and credibility within the U.N. themselves!

  3. #63
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    The Rwandan genocide trials got my eyes going. Life imprisionment for a guy convicted of murdering 6000 people. Line the bastard up against the wall and plug him.

  4. #64
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,723
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut
    That's why I think UN is worthless in its current form.

    Everything needs a mandate. The commander in the field doesn't have the authority to do anything. Gen. MacKenzie in your example worked around the system and took great liberty with it. Thus he was not liked by the bureaucrats in NY. It's like the Congress running the DC police or LBJ picking the air raid targets in Vietnam.
    I definately agree this is one of their weakest points. Mandates through the U.N. take forever and a day. Ironic that in modern world situations "time is of the essence". The U.N. should take note of this step up and evolve with the ever changing times and world conflicts
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 16 Feb 06, at 18:48.

  5. #65
    New Member
    Join Date
    17 Feb 06
    Posts
    3
    The UN process takes the idea of national soveriengty, mixes it with some democracy and beaureacracy and seasons it with some self-agrandising/self-important attitudes.

    Simple fact is that committees are the worst decision makers. When you have a committee made up of almost 200 members each with vested interests then of course decisions will be both slow and to the lowest common denominator.

    It's amazing how great ideals have bad practicalities :(

  6. #66
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Shek's Avatar
    Join Date
    23 Feb 05
    Location
    Krblachistan
    Posts
    11,589
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/05/op...erland&emc=rss

    Give the United Nations a Little Competition

    By RUTH WEDGWOOD
    Published: December 5, 2005

    KOFI ANNAN's term as secretary general of the United Nations has one year to go, and so far he has been unable to deliver on any real institutional reform.

    Paradoxically, it is a "high outside" pitch that could be the most promising route to reform - recognizing the virtues of outside competition. Monopoly can be corrosive for any institution, and many of the problems addressed by the United Nations can be and have been handled in other forums. Washington and Turtle Bay would both be aided by recognizing the virtues of "competitive multilateralism."

    Even after the exposure of corruption in the oil-for-food program, criminal investigations of the procurement process, reports by a "high-level panel" and a bipartisan commission, and a summit meeting of heads of state, there still seems to be no momentum for change at the United Nations. Mr. Annan has simply not swayed the General Assembly with his public pronouncement that "good management is in the interests of everyone."

    The urgency of United Nations reform is easy to diagnose. When resources are scarce for peacekeeping, health and development, it is deadly to keep spinning gold into hay on redundant jobs and expired mandates. Effective use of funds requires transparency and integrity - and becomes nearly impossible when there is a short-staffed inspector general who cannot disclose reports to member states. The organization's important work in human rights becomes satiric when its human rights commission includes gross abusers like Cuba and Zimbabwe.

    Smug reliance on an aging brand name is a real danger in any organization; this is no less true for the United Nations than for corporate behemoths like General Motors. "We are acting for the world community," is the mantra in Turtle Bay, "so we must be O.K." At one time that might have been enough. But it is no longer 1945. There are countless regional and transnational organizations that set standards, send peacekeepers and monitor human rights.

    The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Organization of American States and the African Union all post standards for democratic militaries and human rights. NATO and groups like the Economic Community of West African States supply peacekeepers. Standards are set by international trade and professional associations and independent economic groups like the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision.

    A resort to outside competition is made necessary by the sclerosis of reform inside the United Nations. The place is micro-managed by a General Assembly that is reluctant to change the status quo. Delegating more power to the Secretary General would allow an institutional flexibility that can adapt to changing events. But some voices in the developing world have championed a tactic of control by inefficiency as a way to block the influence of larger members, without seeing that it frustrates the work of the United Nations in their own regions.

    The United States and Japan may seek to delay the biennial budget. But even if that leads to some short-term changes, in the end the General Assembly will still control the inside rules on perpetual mandates, patronage, document retention and transparency. And unless the Europeans are solidly on board, American proposals for reform will be defeated.

    The politics of reform are constrained by the regional solipsism that developed over the organization's first 50 years. During the cold war, the Soviet Union solicited members of the Non-Aligned Movement, an official United Nations caucus, to rally support for its positions against the West. Fidel Castro's Cuba lives on, and still gains influence by wrapping its dictatorship in a cloak of Southern solidarity. American diplomats cannot attend the political discussions of the 115-member group.

    The other major caucus of developing nations, the Group of 77, also meets in private to determine positions. Now tipping the scales with 132 countries, the G-77 can pass or block a measure in the General Assembly entirely on its own. America has friends in both groups, but they often fear breaking with a caucus position lest they lose support on local issues.

    So the situation seems intractable. But that's no reason to sit on the sidelines and lament, year after year, our inability to improve things. If the United Nations can't reform on its own, America needs to support other multilateral venues. In fact, our seeking parallel paths to international intervention can help the United Nations as well.

    As the economist Albert O. Hirschman once observed, "exit" and "voice" are in delicate balance in any successful organization. If threats to exit are casually employed, it drains away impetus to seek internal reform. But if things can't be changed from within, members may need to vote with their feet, one issue at a time.

    The idea of competitive multilateralism avoids the stark choice of going alone or going to the United Nations. America must still support the purposes of the United Nations; it is a historic alliance, a product of World War II, and remains the only all-inclusive political organization around. America enjoys prerogatives as a permanent Security Council member that would be hard to gain again. But we do have some flexibility in how we choose to approach international cooperation.

    The United Nations' specialized programs depend on voluntary financing from member states, and we should direct our money to those that are cost-effective. We can also give funds directly to private relief organizations that show initiative, without a bypass through United Nations middle-management. Relief organizations in newly freed East Timor, for example, were hard put to work around a slow-footed United Nations administrative process.

    On issues where the global organization is impotent or counterproductive, we can make progress through regional organizations and informal coalitions. We can give greater support to regional human rights groups, instead of seeking consensus with political thugs at the Human Rights Commission. We can act in international crises through the Community of Democracies and NATO.

    We can negotiate treaties in various forums. The Cybercrime Convention was negotiated through the Council of Europe, with the United States and other high-tech nations as added participants. Likewise, the Proliferation Security Initiative, begun by the United States and 10 other countries in 2003, has been successful in countering shipments of weapons of mass destruction despite not having a formal treaty structure.

    In the Internet age, there is no single venue for cooperation. This is true for politics and business alike. The United Nations may gain a second wind and a youthful gait if it discovers that it has some real competition.

    Ruth Wedgwood is a professor of international law and organizations at Johns Hopkins University.
    "So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

  7. #67
    Senior Contributor BenRoethig's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Jan 04
    Location
    Dubuque, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    1,458
    No institutional reform? He's involved in the corruption, of course there's no reform. The problem is that he and his cronies have state-like power, yet answer to no one.
    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.

  8. #68
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,723

    Post

    That certainly needs to change without doubt. Who ever replaces him had better be scrutinized from head to toe and his past made known to those that will elect him. Maybe they can clean things up this time around.

  9. #69
    Ray
    Ray is offline
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought
    That certainly needs to change without doubt. Who ever replaces him had better be scrutinized from head to toe and his past made known to those that will elect him. Maybe they can clean things up this time around.
    1996: The US vetoed the re-election of Boutros Boutros-Ghali after accusing him of neglecting to carry out the necessary reforms of the UN bureaucracy. In his departing remarks, Boutros-Ghali said that inadequate resources, namely large debts owed to the UN, of which the US held the largest, had prevented him from achieving successful reforms. The General Assembly warmly applauded Boutros-Ghali before appointing Ghana native Kofi Annan as his successor. Annan first came to the attention of US Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright during his work in the former Yugoslavia as head of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations. As such, he became the first career UN official to rise to the organization's top position.

    2001: After a successful first term of significant changes, including a more fiscally responsible budget and the strengthening of human rights and field missions, Kofi Annan was unanimously re-elected to a second term. The Security Council, in a display of strong support, quickly nominated Annan for re-election six months before the year-end deadline of his first term. In his swearing-in speech, Annan addressed the relationship between the people of the world and the UN as a primary priority in his future agenda. He also reaffirmed his continued commitment to the reform efforts of the organization.
    http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.aspx?c...27&printmode=1
    Interesting, what?


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  10. #70
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,723

    Post

    Ray,
    I dont knock the man (Kofi Anan) because I do see him as a good man. (He must be if they elected him as its head) however there are points of corruption in the organization that must be rooted out in order for it to keep its prominence in the world today and possibly improve upon it. Just respectfully MO
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 17 Feb 06, at 17:10.

  11. #71
    Ray
    Ray is offline
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    Power corrupts.

    Its everywhere.


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  12. #72
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,723
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray
    Power corrupts.

    Its everywhere.

    Undeniably agree.

  13. #73
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnought
    Ray,
    I dont knock the man (Kofi Anan) because I do see him as a good man.
    How could anyone be a good man after the Rwanda fiasco?

  14. #74
    Defense Professional Dreadnought's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 May 05
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA.
    Posts
    14,723

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
    How could anyone be a good man after the Rwanda fiasco?
    OOE, I dont know much in depth on that issue so IMO i cannot openly comment.

    If it is discussed I would be more then willing to learn though through opposing views.

    In my own defense you gentlemen being military and holding your rank would know far better then me what transpired there.

  15. #75
    Senior Contributor BenRoethig's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Jan 04
    Location
    Dubuque, Iowa, United States
    Posts
    1,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray
    Power corrupts.

    Its everywhere.
    Especially when its absolute power and you don't answer to anybody.
    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. F16 - Most Useless Modern Plane?
    By PubFather in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 151
    Last Post: 26 Jun 06,, 11:10
  2. Kashmir moot useless: Mirwaiz
    By Ray in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27 May 06,, 20:30
  3. Useless Facts
    By THL in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 20 Mar 06,, 18:54
  4. OIC wants permanent UNSC seat
    By troung in forum International Politics
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 18 Jul 05,, 22:55
  5. Adjustment Lending useless concept
    By Adjustment in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 26 Feb 05,, 14:45

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •