Poll: United States or United Nations

[Maj]

Either a partnership of countries formed upon a foundation of humanitarian interests and diplomatic conflict resolution. The ideal UN.

Or. A state dedicated to the preservation and proliferation of individal freedoms and economic prosperity from a platform built upon a strong passion for human welfare. The ideal state. The ideal U.S.

Realistically ... I'll go either way.

 

[Norlamand]

The question is irrelevant. The US has the power and should use it as need, but not abuse it. The UN can remain a marginally relevant debate club.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

Originally posted by Norlamand
The question is irrelevant.

Precisely. It is irrelevant, because power itself allocates power, and nothing else.

 

[Enemy Ace]

Originally posted by Norlamand
The question is irrelevant. The US has the power and should use it as need, but not abuse it. The UN can remain a marginally relevant debate club.

I cannot say I disagree.

 

[Sarevok]

powerfrul as the uN is, they have no "real" power, just influence. therefore the US is better suited as it does have the power to "police the world". Im not saying its right, but im saying the UN is less effective at it.

 

[Packer-Backer]

For what the UN was meant to do, it has failed terribly. For one thing it was meant to stop dictators before they have too much power, but it took the superior USA to kick Saddam right in the @$$. Let the UN give out humanitarian aid, but other than that the only connection to war it has is saying "If you invade that evil dictatorship, we'll sanction you! Oh wait, you already won the war and a brutal man is out of power. But we still are going to keep you out of our secret club!" Let the US do what the US has to do and keep the UN to giving out aid.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by ltcoljt
The US will not yield to the UN and especially not to the EU ever. And remember we have nukes and we will use them.

No we wont. We dont want to get nuked back.

 

[amadeus]

The UN is like those chattering teeth. We wind them up every now and then and they scoot around opening up their mouth.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
The UN is like those chattering teeth. We wind them up every now and then and they scoot around opening up their mouth.

Now there is something I can agree with.
The UN is about as useless as tits on a boar hog.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Originally posted by capslock
Here is a good saying: Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US.

I can get pretty anti-UN, but I'd never agree to that statement.

Right now, the UN is hanging on to some semblance of legitimacy mainly given to it by non-powers (or even lesser powers, such as France) who have nothing or little else other than UN membership to give them a place on the world stage. If the US were to leave the UN, anti-American and anti-Israel forces in the UN, of which there are many (a majority of the members, I would imagine) would be free to pass all of the anti-US and anti-Israel legislation they please. The US would be powerless to stop it. It would not be largely relevant, but it would be mighty annoying.

The US veto prevents that from happening right now. I have no problem with the US not consulting the UN on policy decisions or wars, but we need to keep our veto there to neutralize the organization.

 

[amadeus]

And so it appears someone has enjoyed my comments in this thread...

h4ppy?

 

[h4ppy]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
And so it appears someone has enjoyed my comments in this thread...

h4ppy?

It's a really good saying.

 

[Free Enterprise]

Originally posted by archer_007


No we wont. We dont want to get nuked back.

The NMD (National Missile Defense) is currently in progress this could probably deal with any ICBM launched nuclear weapons from any country except for Russian and China (although it would not be long before China could be dealt with). It has very good reliability so far under tests.

 

[EzInKy]

Originally posted by Free Enterprise


The NMD (National Missile Defense) is currently in progress this could probably deal with any ICBM launched nuclear weapons from any country except for Russian and China (although it would not be long before China could be dealt with). It has very good reliability so far under tests.

You should put as much faith in NMD as you would a moat around a castle. It may work for a while but eventually someone will figure a way past it.

 

[EzInKy]

To get the power from the US you'd have to become more powerful than the US.

 

[Phantom Lord]

Originally posted by h4ppy
U.S.A. all the way! In the past Superpowers got to have power over other nations so why can't America, its our turn and you can't deny that.

Of course one can deny that. As a matter of fact the US is currently unable to invade another country at the moment. Not enough money and the people at home wouldn't play as well. Now who needs a police that can't deal with more than one criminal at one time and only chases criminals if it has own economical interests in doing so?

Besides that, the US have not been elected sheriff of the world and are not accepted to play that role by the majority of countries.

Therefore: UN all the way.

 

[Phantom Lord]

Originally posted by Free Enterprise


The NMD (National Missile Defense) is currently in progress this could probably deal with any ICBM launched nuclear weapons from any country except for Russian and China (although it would not be long before China could be dealt with). It has very good reliability so far under tests.

It has at best average reliability against slow missiles and stands no chance against fast ones. That whole missile defense project simply can't work, because due to its complexity it will always develop much slower than the missiles it should intercept.

 

[Emperor Xerxes]

Originally posted by ltcoljt
The US will not yield to the UN and especially not to the EU ever. And remember we have nukes and we will use them.

Oh dear lord.

 

[Oruc]

Neither

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Out of the two, the US. Hands down.