but they when't in without UN's ok.  So by how UN works shouldn't they have deployed piece keepers.
138309
The coalition of the willing (36 countries with boots on the ground and 78 countries offering logistic support) that went in to Iraq, went in under UN charter and 14 different resolutions from the 90 cease fire agreement. Nato is currently involved in helping train Iraqi troops and police.\nCanada is doing a very good job helping us in the war against terrorism with their troops that are deployed in Afghanistan. The UN peace keepers seem to have their hands full in Africa, the Ivory coast and Haiti, along with other locations.
143313
You have just stumbled onto the reason why embargoes are frequently threatened, but rarely actually carried out.  When they fail to accomplish their objective, it's very, very difficult for the leadership of the embargoing country to get out of the mess without egg on their face.\n\nThey may pompously say that it's actually working and wait until the next election when it would be the OTHER guy's problem.  Or they may make up some excuse to say that the conditions have "changed" (whether they really did or not) so the embargo can be lifted.  Or they can just proclaim "victory", lift the embargo, and hope that nobody notices.\n\nBut you are correct, too often they continue the senseless act and continue to hurt innocent citizens because they are too full of pride to admit that it was a mistake in the first place.
53541
No.  These are the primary governments that ensured the safety of the world during WWII.  While other governments did half-measures, these stood up, lost an entire generation of their young blood to stop the total loss of freedom for self-government.   Perhaps after this round against terrorism, we should count the countries that stood up and kick a couple off the UN SC.
616763
The reason why the UN is established in the first place is to have a neutral ground where international disputes and issues can be discussed by all the member states.  Therefore, I think that having the UN is better than having each state have their say on international issues using their own ways (wars, etc.)  It was after the second world war that this organization came to be.  Hence, it is an important impartial way of avoiding conflicts worldwide.
94865
A better question would be to ask why the government of the United States sends the US military into other countries in peacekeeping roles (Bosnia, for example) while the countries in the area - who's own best interests would be served by not having their neighbor self-destruct - do nothing.
69164
The UN has always been a joke.  Recent US actions didnt change that they just pointed out what we all already knew.  I am visiting Bosnia and all the places that were designated UN safe zones where everybody got murdered because they were foolish enough to trust the UN.  Until the UN actually shows it is competant enough to do something (anything) the US and other countries like Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia will just keep doing whatever they want whether you agree with these actions is another question.
245377
This time, I don't care if the U.S. has to, metaphorically, take the UN by the scruff of the neck and smash their smug, self-righteous faces into the conference table.  I don't care if we have to berate and belittle them.  The UN is making itself IRRELEVANT.  It never does anything but talk.\n\nAnother person just wrote about the killings and starvation deaths in Rwanda and the Sudan, tacitly approved by the UN through their inaction.  We need a public relations campaign to improve the image of the U.S., and to expose the UN for the frauds they are.
356311
in order to get a job with the UN is to know someone.  I have tried for 5 years. I speak 5 languages, i have a computer background, run a business with 50 employees.  since I have no connection i can not get in.
363622
Good question. Who would charge them with war crimes? The UN? That's a joke. The truth is no one will ever charge them. And Nothing can ever be done about it. People in this country (US) want to treat our soldiers as if they were monsters for killing terrorists. Our troops deserve many thanks. Compared to Russian war strategies we are saints!
423845
I don't think they know what to do. That was a very organized effort. More troops does not provide management skills.
602062
Republicans do not like the UN. And republican governments have sent in their minions to use the UN as a tool to attain its own goals. Democrats support the UN in its unadulterated form. What you are talking about is a resolution pushed for by a republican US government. Yes, the democrats support the UN and if the UN were to perform as it was originally intended then the 17 resolutions would not be created in the first place. Those resolutions were created under compulsion of the republican government of the USA, so they were in fact not UN but resolutions of the current US government.\n\nYour logic is kind of twisted, even to the point of wickedness. It's almost like this: Person A loves Person B and would listen to Person B because B is peaceloving fellow. You take Person B hostage and force him to ask Person A to attack Person C. When Person A objects, you raise this question, "But you said you support B and his decisions so why won't you shoot A?"\nWell, duh, Person B only issued those orders because you were holding a gun to his head! So in effect they were not B's decision but merely your decision coming out of B's mouth.\n\nWhich part of this don't you understand?
430981
Well ,it is a good question.I believe that United Nations Security Consul has many obligations,in fact it is crated in order to prevent violations and atrocity and to keep peace and security in the world ,but unfortunately peace and security are not totally prevailed!in the world and we blame always US because it makes more decisions in UNSC. I think others permanent members in the counsel has responsibility too,we blame US, UK for there roll but in fact France china,Russia are also have did less or nothing for peace and security in the world which they should have done !!.and this is a big problem .of course it is right that US keep it,s interests but I believe without US ,there will be more dictators,terrorists,atrocity in the world. If we look the policy among different nations then we can understand that only US policy has significant diplomacy and bring nations to dialog which is in my view undeniable, it is all members responsibility in UNSC in order to functions be more acceptable.
605483
The US HAD an isolationist policy before we were dragged into WWII. I don't think our isolation in the 1930's bought us much happiness or kept us out of what was going on in the world.\n\nSome would say our reluctance made our eventual enemies BOLDER and created a bigger mess to eventually clean up.\n\nI think we should directly deal with threats to our security. The UN can be utilized for "policing" the other troubled spots.
674942
Given the history of scandals within the bureaucratically bloated and inept U.N., I don't understand how ANYONE could trust the direction of these 'peace missions' to a corrupt individual like Kofi Annan?\n\nThe U.N. needs to be COMPLETELY OVERHAULED, or DISSOLVED.  Until any of those things happens, I suggest that the U.S. and its allies take a a long and scenic detour off of the U.N. 'Pretentiousness Highway'...
534788
Not in my book it isn't acceptable. We are not the world's keepers. I have no objection to a coalition of different countries and the United States being one of them in some of the world's hot spots when needed. However for the world to expect us to solve its problems...no way.
201893
the Mexican government uses military to patrol their boarders so why can't we do the same? I don't see the problem there
10776
No people are in the UN, only countries.  The UN is not mostly European, it consists of virtually every country in the world.   \n\nThere is plenty wrong with the Un -- but calling it a "pansy" organization is a little silly.