Partial list...

1945 UN founded
1948 Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq attack Israel
1950-1953 : Korean war
1959-1975 : Vietnam war
1967 Egypt, Syria and Jordan set up naval blockade of Israel (act of war)
1971 Operation Search Light - 500k-3mil dead
1973 Egypt and Syria attack Israel
1975 "Zionism is racism" (Resolution 3379) - Eventually rescinded in 1991
1975-1999 - East Timor : 200k (1/3 of the population) dead
1975-1979 - Cambodia : 1.7mil dead
1979-1989 - Russian/Afghan war
1981-1983 - Guatemala : The Silent Holocaust
1992-1995 - Bosnia
1994 Rwanda
1996 Oil for food established
2001 Bush sworn into office Jan 20

Not to mention the accusations of child rape and sexual abuse by peacekeeping missions in Congo, Sudan, Haiti, Liberia,...

Damn you W, you brought down the UN!

>>Oh, c'mon, Srdjan - the U.N was useless long before 9/11. When it comes to enforcing international peace, they have been nothing but a debate society for decades. Their ineptitude and corruption (remember oil for food?) has nothing to do with the current U.S. administration. Nothing at all.
>
>That is not what I am talking about. I said UN was not perfect, but UN itself had more influence on world matters then it is now.
>Every organisation has it's flaws and problems, even your legal system/judiciary but yet you will not undermine/aleviate US court authority/decisions right ? But idea of having strong world institutions/bodies (UN) was/is very important and I would say more important and necessary then ever before.
>
>Current administration crossed several lines when it comes to world relations, policies etc, changing world political situation
>for far worse then it was before. 9/11 was simply point when gloves were all off but that process of undermining UN already started before. In this 'new conditions' of destabilised world where army invasions are 'ok' , UN resolutions
>have no meanings, SC council is more less always blocked, what UN can possibly do except to distribute food, and stage as someone said 'talk shows' ?
>
>In order to have meaning, UN needs authority. In order to have authority then big powers at first have to delegate some of it to UN. Once you delegate authority, then they have to as well respect this authority like everybody else. This kind of process would have been natural continuation of progress achieved on world political scene (end of cold war) but apparently everybody had their own plans.
>
>Now after all lines were crossed (NATO stupid bombing of Serbia bridges, Invasion on Afganistan, Iraq, Independance of Kosovo etc) do you actually expect UN to ever become sort real world parlament (democracy is what we aim for right ?) where China or Russia would delegate part of real authority over their own selves ? Israel ? Midle east countries ?
>What we are facing now is going historically almost hundred years back, to times where capital expansion routinely staged wars to suit their own interests. So we are back not to 1945 when UN idea/movement was started to actually prevent future genocides and ww3 from happening, bit actually somewhere in 1908 to a world brewing/sliding towards huge conflicts.
>
>You expect somebody to respect some international world court (Hag war crimes tribunal for instance) after US seeks/gets exception from prosecution ? You expect Russia not to intervene in Georgia for a more or less just cause after, US invaded Iraq on actual lie ?
>And now what, SC is to make resolution against Russia intervention which Russia is to actually respect ? Should they ?
>Or should they laugh at press conference (as Lavrov did) saying ; Hey... we are not in a business of invading/overturning dictators - you are <g> Do you blame him ?
>
>Today it is Iraq, Georgia; I wander what future brings. Certainly nothing good if things continue this way. We need strong
>respectable UN more then ever, whereas it was actually never worse. Stronger NATO does not help your security, stronger UN
>and world which respect law and order does. Cold war is over, we don't need new carriers, we need peace, we need greener planet.
>
>Huh I better stop, this probably already sounds like naive romanticisam (and CharlesH is always arround the corner with story about
> 'usefull idiots' <vbg> ) but think about it anyway :)
>
>Cheers :)
>Sergio
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>