Yeah, but at the time the US could have fought every nation on the planet to a standtill and the USSR could have fought every nation on the planet but the US to a standstill, so there was no way to not make them permanent members of the security council with veto power since they could just ignore other countries if they wanted.
The permanent UNSC members with veto power was a huge mistake. But possibly it was nessecary or these members wouldn’t have joined at all and the UN would have been stillborn. The US now has cast more vetoes than the rest of the UNSC permanent members combined
Russia has veto it vote against any resolution about Ukraine. European countries still provide billions in aid and arms to Ukraine to defend itself . The genocide convention is a bigger authority document than UN resolutions
Yes it is flawed, but it was basically “give the 5 largest powers veto power, or they don’t participate”. If they don’t participate, it would be even more ornamental than it currently is.
Ideally they would have more power to stop shit like this, but the UN as it stands is better than nothing. They do bring countries together to talk things through that otherwise might not have and have successfully de-escilated issues in the past.
I’m not saying people shouldn’t expect, or push for, better, and I’m not saying this is your view point, but I do see the sentiment that they’re useless/do nothing quite often.
Walking out won’t ultimately achieve much… But it’s at least better than sitting their and letting him feel validated in his psychopathic plans.
US has veto power. There is no possible way for the UN to do anything.
The UN is flawed by design.
Yeah, but at the time the US could have fought every nation on the planet to a standtill and the USSR could have fought every nation on the planet but the US to a standstill, so there was no way to not make them permanent members of the security council with veto power since they could just ignore other countries if they wanted.
Its been flawed for a pretty long time at this point. The fact that Russia has remained a member for all these years is proof enough of that.
The permanent UNSC members with veto power was a huge mistake. But possibly it was nessecary or these members wouldn’t have joined at all and the UN would have been stillborn. The US now has cast more vetoes than the rest of the UNSC permanent members combined
Russia has veto it vote against any resolution about Ukraine. European countries still provide billions in aid and arms to Ukraine to defend itself . The genocide convention is a bigger authority document than UN resolutions
Yes it is flawed, but it was basically “give the 5 largest powers veto power, or they don’t participate”. If they don’t participate, it would be even more ornamental than it currently is.
Ideally they would have more power to stop shit like this, but the UN as it stands is better than nothing. They do bring countries together to talk things through that otherwise might not have and have successfully de-escilated issues in the past.
I’m not saying people shouldn’t expect, or push for, better, and I’m not saying this is your view point, but I do see the sentiment that they’re useless/do nothing quite often.
Walking out won’t ultimately achieve much… But it’s at least better than sitting their and letting him feel validated in his psychopathic plans.
I am not asking for a legal framework to enforce acts of anti-genocide.
Doesn’t matter what you’re asking for. Anything can be vetoed.
Says a bunch war criminals rotting in jail.