Do you think in this age of Uni-polarism, the US will be able to totally control the United Nations?
547748
Yes!!Take a closer look!! Through economics or politics, the U.S.already controls the world.Anyone who speaks out against them( Bush Administration)-France,Iraq,Iran,Venezuela-face invasion or some other form of retaliation. China is being courted,Cuba is being paid,Mexico has the illegal immigrant thing going on and there is no balance of power left. It would take the other countries banding together to stop this and they are kept distracted with internal turmoil or an unwillingness to put aside their long standing differences.What was your question again??Peace.
625360
It can, but only if we first fire our corrupt-ass politicians who have defamed our nation for ages.\n\nHaving said that, we have to aim to catch up with Europe first & later on China, Japan and the USA. It's because we still don't have the massive manufacturing power that the latter three have at the moment. This whole process could easily take like 50 years or more.
1071970
The future of the United States is bright, indeed.  I had doubts a short while back, but people are remembering how to speak up.\nWe will always be powerful, perhaps the top superpower, but we will never try to stop someone from being more successful if they have their people's interests at heart.  Oh, we'll protect our interests, but we have always cheered the success of other countries who serve their people first and their ideology last.   Should everyone be a capitalist, a representative democratic republic?  I don't think so, but there are going to be more, and we'll have to compete with them, and I'll love every second of it.  Competition that isn't based on the slavery of a people (like China is close to) is to be commended and encouraged.\n\nIf there is another superpower that grows above us, I suspect that we'll have a hand in making it that way.  After all, we've been helping all our "older brothers" (older countries) for some time now.  It would be nice if they could do it on their own so we could enjoy our youth and riches a bit more.  \n\nEuropean Union?  Go for it!  China getting more democratic and keeping it's power?  We're with you!  Russia regaining world attention but remaining a people-first state?  Great!\n\nWe'll be there, probably contentedly resting on our laurels until we're woken again.  For now, we're awake and stomping our feet on the one's who woke us up unjustly.  After they're dust, we'll go back to slumber and do business as usual, but we'll never be less than a giant.
149591
If that happens the US will pull all our funding and whatever troops that are under their peacekeeper control.\n\nWithout US support there is NO UN.  \n\nSo they can try.  I would love to get rid of that organization it has done nothing but steal, bad mouth the US and Israel, and waste our money.\n\nWe haven't done anything that we shouldn't have anyway.  Well the Bay of Pigs but that was Kennedy leaving the Cubans out to dry
524807
The idea of the United Nations is a great one.  In the sense that it provides a forum for nations to discuss their differences and develop compromises it does what is intended.  However, it has also been very ineffectual in stopping differences between nations which have entered into violent relationships.\n\nIt also promotes and lifts up to high positions nations which treat their own people in a terrible manner, thereby rewarding nations for not following the mission of the United Nations.  \n\nIt seems that the possibility of breaking up the United Nations is becoming increasingly likely.  Maybe that would be best and to begin again with a new direction.  Certainly many nations would (apparently) be happier if the United States simply left the United Nations and, maybe that would be best.
898894
I agree with it and I think it will happen. It already has in more enlightened countries and the US will follow eventually.
508094
if by 'our' you mean USA, then yes. Quite a while, bye the way.
364806
Yes it can - if all nations begin to cooperate more fully.
350374
Absolutly not!! We wouldn't take the states if bush wrapped it up and  gave it to us with a bow. The states would screw up our economic triumphs and social gains. The us would only be a step in the wrong direction.
123834
absolutely, especially if the United Nations handles it.
977806
No I don't think so as the UN has already chosen Ban Ki-Moon as the sucessor to Kofi Annan.\n\nThe debate has been long gone and over. You're a couple of months too late to start thinking about it now!
917542
The UN is controlled by the security council where the permanent members have a veto.They are first and foremost responsible for any failure of the UN in anything.I admit it's more than annoying but it's also weird to blame the UN as a front to not have to blame the world community.\nThe UN can only be as strong or as weak as its members
529754
Most definitely.  We need to do some cleaning up ourself before we can help others.  The U.N. is a good idea in itself (like Communism is, I mean you can't say the idea of it is a bad thing, it just doesn't work in reality) but so far it's been just a bitch.  I know I'm tired of going through the U.N. I mean just look at the dumping scandal.  No one can really be trusted anymore.\n\nMy only qualm is that if we go back into the Monroe Doctrine phase, we will resort to Isolationism.  We, being a world power and major influence (to some degree), can't afford to go back to being isolated.  It would just be like backing down and letting the world do as it pleases--no Americans, I would think, would want foreign people dictating how we should run our lives (just as noone else would want that, either).  So it's sort of a black and white question with so many gray areas it isn't even funny.
1059763
I don't think it is advisable nor feasible that one leader over the entire world would be a good idea. While perhaps someone to regulate the sovereign countries may seem smart in all essence you have to remember the human factor. Once you give someone that much power it becomes harder and harder to regulate them and keep corruption out of the top ranking offices. Capitalism started out helping America, but has quickly turned fascist, because the human factor was left out of the equation. A single person in charge of the world I fear would be inviting trouble. While I wouldn't even recommend a committee to be in charge of the entire world it makes more sense than one person.
897349
Of course they do, and they want the U.N. at the helm!\n\nThe United Nations actively pursues anti-American policies and appeases America's enemies, while being largely funded by $3 billion worth of annual American dues. After revealing the depth of rampant corruption in the UN, it is time to recognize the changes in Old Europe and redesign America's alliances that line up with America's national interests. \n\nIf John Kerry and Hillary Clinton have their way, Kofi Annan and Jacques Chirac will gain veto power over American foreign policy. Scared? You should be. It could happen. And in Inside the Asylum, former deputy undersecretary of defense Jed Babbin shows just how it could happen and why the UN deserves the nickname "The Asylum." \n\nIn the Asylum... \n\n* the UN assists international terrorists. Babbin exposes the shocking links between the UN and terrorist organizations. \n\n* The money trail from the UN to Saddam Hussein. It is time to rip the veil from the outrageous Oil-for-Food program-proving that the UN sold its moral legitimacy for oil, stuffed its own pockets at the expense of the Iraqi people, and undermined American pressure on Saddam Hussein: the UN's cash cow. The UN's Oil-for-Food program, provided Saddam Hussein with the means to bribe politicians, to deprive his people of needed food and medicine, and to literally steal billions of dollars. There is even emerging evidence that money from the program might have gone to support al-Qaeda. \n\n• The UN's raid on the American Treasury: dominated by Third World staffers who consider the United States Treasury "the common heritage of mankind." Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, is an anti-American moral relativist who misses no opportunity to arrogate power from the United States to the UN. \n\n* The United Nations and the European Union are morally bankrupt-and open enemies of the United States. France and the United Nations have cost American lives in Iraq by their perverse delaying of American action in the Iraq War. American troops are fighting and dying today because of a terrorist strategy Saddam Hussein developed while France and the United Nations delayed Operation Iraqi Freedom. \n\nThe UN is more of an international criminal than a dispenser of legitimate international law. If America wants to retain its sovereignty and security, it's time to escape from the UN asylum and say goodbye to the false friends of Old Europe. We owe no tribute to the UN and the EU, We should not be ashamed and divided to look after our own defense." \n\nThe United Nations building in Manhattan is an international enclave, no longer American territory. Inside the Asylum is a powerful argument that it's time to reclaim that land for America.
978823
Yes and you can bet UN resolutions would get reinforced, instead of the present UN leader that has no backbone and will not take a stand!!!!! Bush does what is right not what is popular and that is what the UN needs!!!!
919456
Hi, Triumph.  Every big brother has a tendency to poke his ugly nose into the affairs of the younger ones.  US is no exception.  Till the commencement of Second World War, the US was a non-interfering country and it was busy in the development of its own people.  When it became a super power, it started to think that it has got a right to inerfere in the affairs of other countries as if it is the protector of the entire globe.  This attitude of superiority complex has become the major hindrance for the international peace because some other countries also want to follow the same principle.