bbc.com/news/world-australia-37335543
Is it really necessary? Couldn’t they achieve similar results by just having a mixed martial arts contest, whoever wins gets to run the show for 5 years and blabber incoherently?
I want Paul Hogan to be the Ambassador to the US, he has to dress like Crocodile Dundee though as his official dress for state.
I dunno, the UN has been building a bad rep since I was a kid. There is no doubt we need a world unit but, the UN has become self serving not world serving. Dropping out won’t change it, staying in and being honest will. England made a mistake.
No you made a mistake.
With that post. lol
Okeydokey
The U.N. is completely powerless and pacifistic, as it has proven many times over.
Great article, I agree with everything in it.
Thanks Turd. 
No, UN on occasion, usually just in the Congo, goes on the offensive and fights real wars, just does so bizarrely… Unfortunately many real wars are fought bizarrely, so can’t say that is a unique UN issue.
There is a international ideological class regarding should the UN get involved in actual policing, responding to novel situations, or remain inert. You gotta understand this means the US, China, Brazil, Mongolia… people anywhere, trusting in the instincts, training, and geopolitical understanding of some company Commander from Nepal under a Ukrainian Colonel in a multinational force to say “Hey, this us a potential threat, 13 miles down the road just outside my Area of Operation, not under our official mandate, but is a staging area, they use it as a base to massacre civilians, I’m taking them out now, as it us a rare chance to get them all”.
How well do you trust that Captain from Nepal? What if he attacks the wrong rebels, or even allies of the government the UN is protecting to trying to stop from getting oppressive? That can lead to decades of further deployments if the conflict ignites in a new unforeseen pattern, cause some guy hopelessly ignorant and poorly trained gets trigger happy on some bad Intel.
Then again, it is horrible when a genocide is occurring just outside the base, and they don’t even try, lacking orders. They have no rear cause to risk their lives, and when they do, such as India in the Congo, other factions will make rape and bribery allegations against troops or leaders (undoubtedly some prostitution going on) trying to cause a political controversy that gets entire national deployments ripped out of theater… the militias hope to fill this void.
It isnt easily solved. I don’t trust many countries, they may try hard, but try isn’t good enough. You gotta have the willingness to die so people can have a better future. Some countries are better at producing deployable troops of this altruistic bent than others. You also need a kind yet stern force, capable of compassion and restraint, and fearless in releasing the whoopass, but without bring needlessly cruel or economically and ecologically destructive in doing so. The UN did well in the early Korea War, but it was tremendously destructive. Not enough emphasis on getting refugees to safety. If we stick with the UN model, within a couple hundred years, it will evolve into a world military, a world government of sorts. I don’t care if it takes 5,000 years though, I see no need to rush it… but if we are going to do these multinational deployments, I want it from militaries I could trust with my own life, if I had to live under them. If I’m floundering in a flood, will you come save me, or merely unleash Cholera on my community from bad latrine disposal, sitting snug and tight as we drown? I don’t see the UN as trust worthy, you never know the mix your going to get.