Welcome to Final Fantasy Forums, a community where you can discuss your love for all things Final Fantasy. Just go ahead and register for a free account. Community features:
Bone VillageAlternate forum for discussions on serious issues and topics. This forum is where you can discuss these topics in a more relaxed manner, and while you still can't spam, you don't need to debate.
Join Date: December 2007
Location: Hunting with Bungalow Bill
Age: 18
Posts: 1,063
Threads: 15
Gil: 22,490
Member No.: 7778
My Mood:
Rep Power: 3
The UN
as part of the international relations course for A2 history, there is a part on the UN
Now before i started studying the UN i thought they where a bit useless, but learning more about thr UN just confirms that.
So what do you guys think of the UN? good or bad?
also compared to the LON and to the role of other countries you have intervened in world affairs ie US, China, USSR/Russia
this is for the the start of the UN untill present day.
do you think the UN is succesful at what it is meant to do, or do you think its more a symbol that countries can co-operate and nothing more.
discuss
__________________
Made by RandomPokes. For great Justice
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Hunter
i just bought FF7 : DOC and when i put it inside my PS2 my PS2 brust into fire
RIP Dog Hunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erythritol
Yeah, I'm not sure what "pro-choice" campaigns you've seen, but I'm relatively sure that no pro-choice women are going and campaigning for the right to shoot up
Carve your name into my arm. Instead of stressed, I lie here charmed.
Join Date: August 2007
Location: New York
Age: 21
Posts: 473
Threads: 18
Gil: 0
Member No.: 6775
My Mood:
Rep Power: 2
To be honest, I don't have very much faith in the United Nations. I think what they stand for is lovely and very admirable, but just not realistic. Quite frankly, I think they're somewhat of a useless organization. They're really involved with human rights and peace, right? Well what took so fucking long with Darfur? What exactly were they waiting for? They just completely ignored it for a long time. And when they finally get their act together, they send in a few peacekeeping forces. What the hell is that going to do? What a nice gesture, but in genocides, it's not the thought that counts. That, I think, is the problem with the United Nations. They don't have the necessary forces to accomplish their goals. Yes, it would be lovely if it didn't take violence to stop genocide, but it does. The old saying "fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity" is ridiculous. How exactly, then, is peace achieved? We all just put flowers in our hair and sit around listening to The Beatles and everything horrible in the world disappears? Please. Many tyrannical people only understand violence and force. The United Nations does not have that force. And while their ideas about world peace are really admirable, they just aren't realistic. There will NEVER be world peace.
So in summation, after going off on tangents, I think the UN is more of a symbolic organization than anything else.
__________________
"The day is coming when a single carrot, freshly observed, will set off a revolution."
Join Date: December 2007
Location: Just South of the South pole
Age: 17
Posts: 55
Threads: 2
Gil: 0
Member No.: 7655
Rep Power: 1
I think that they could definitely be a more prominent voice in the world's problems, but considering the amount of work they have to do, it's quite admirable.
Considering the amount of countries that they have to manage without resorting to violence and remaining neutral, they do well.
I'm a bit dissapointed that they are forced to remain neutral, cannot use force unless they are attacked. (like in Darfur and Rwanda. The agressor and "bad" group is easy to tell, but they can't actually help stop the violence. they can only help the people by helping them recover after they get attacked.
The UN 
Linear Mode
