The United States of America Should Withdraw From the United Nations

CapitalismMagazine.com ^ | October 17, 2004 | Alan Caruba

[Tailgunner Joe]

There was a time when, if you wrote or spoke out against the United Nations, you would be dismissed as some "right-wing nutcase" who saw conspiracies or was some kind of "isolationist" who didn't understand the need for an international forum where the problems of the world could be resolved without resort to warfare.

Turns out that the United Nations, founded in 1948, is not simply incapable of stopping wars and genocides, it is so utterly corrupt that it needs to be eliminated entirely in the hope that the many other existing international organizations, treaties, unilateral and bilateral relations can be allowed to do what it will not and cannot.

This is not a new thought to me, but it resurfaced as I read an October 9 news article about “a tough new anti-terrorism resolution aimed at stemming attacks on civilians by denying terrorists safe havens, weapons, financial resources, and freedom of movement.” Introduced by the Russian Federation, it was unanimously passed by the UN Security Council. It was described as strengthening the “essential coordinating role of the United Nations in the international campaign against the terrorist threat.”

This is the same United Nations that did nothing when Red China invaded and occupied Tibet.

This is the same United Nations that stood by while Rwanda went about the business of slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

This is the same United Nations that has been unable to stop the Sudan from conducting genocide against more than a million of its Christian citizens. And Sudan is a member of the UN Human Rights Commission!

This is the same United Nations that has been unable to persuade Syria to withdraw its occupation troops from Lebanon.

This is the same United Nations that has stood by for years as the Palestinians waged a terrorist campaign against the Israelis and then chided the Israelis for building a fence as a means to defend themselves.

This is the same United Nations that needed a coalition led by the United States to force Iraq to withdraw from its invasion of Kuwait and then spent twelve years passing one useless resolution after another to get Saddam Hussein’s Iraq to disarm. After its Oil-for-Food administrators and key members of its Security Council wallowed in corruption, it faintly blessed the US effort to remove an important base for terrorist planning, training, and funding.

This is the same United Nations that needed the United States to intervene when the North Koreans invaded the south in the 1950s and whose atomic energy agency has been unable to stop North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. Now Iran is thumbing its nose at the UN. It’s not nuclear proliferation that is the problem, it’s which country is led by people who are deemed most likely to use these weapons. The mere prospect of a nuclear exchange drove Pakistan and India to the table to resolve longtime conflicts.

And, yes, this was the United Nations that stood by while the United States pursued an ill-fated war against the North Vietnamese when they invaded the south.

The United Nations has been unable to respond to outbreaks of violence in Haiti, Somalia, Cambodia, and Kosovo, to name just a few places where it has demonstrated its ineptitude.

As the scholar Jeremy A. Rabkin points out, “The Security Council has never authorized outside military intervention solely to protect people from slaughter at the hands of their own government.”

Now, three years since 9-11, an event that changed not just the United States, but alerted the entire world to the threat posed by an organization that is not a nation, but a group dedicated to imposing Islam, the Security Council has passed another useless resolution, vowing to do something about it.

Meanwhile, the United Nations has been largely sustained by the twenty-five percent of its annual budget paid by the United States, plus the $1.4 billion the US gives to United Nations’ programs and agencies. US taxpayers fund more of the UN’s activities than all of the other 177 member nations. At the same time, the vast majority of the recipients of US foreign aid routinely vote against the wishes of the United States. Most of those opposing US initiatives come from Africa and the Middle East.

Since the founding of the United Nations in 1948, there have been 291 wars resulting in 22 million deaths. The US Department of State lists 36 terrorist organizations operating with impunity in at least 60 UN member nations. Some 47 member nations are dictatorships and the UN roster includes six terrorist states.

Please, let us not even discuss its human rights record. At one point, it ejected the United States from membership in its Human Rights Commission and installed Libya to chair its meetings. Libya!

A Gallup poll in September 2003 found that sixty percent of Americans said the UN was doing “a poor job.” It’s not just doing a poor job; it is actively seeking to undermine the concept of sovereignty for every nation in the world. It is actively seeking to become a world government. It wants to impose its own taxes. It wants its own military force. It wants to ban ownership of guns. It wants control of the world’s oceans and seas. Its Kyoto Protocol will seek to impose limits on the use of various forms of energy vital to industrialized nations, while exempting some like China and India.

There are elements of the United Nations that are doing some good work--but all of these good elements could be done by other organizations, both more cheaply and more effectively (case in point, the scandal ridden Oil for Food program). It has helped refugees. Its World Health Organization tries to improve conditions. There are, I’m sure other examples, but overall the UN is a cesspool of corruption and the nexus of evil that blithely ignores its original mandates.

Welcome to the existing and growing majority of Americans who think it’s time to withdraw from the United Nations and find other means to address the world’s problems, unilaterally, bilaterally, and effectively.

[austinaero]

Amen. Kick them off our soil too!

[viaveritasvita]

Good article. I could never understand why some Americans are so enamored of the UN. They never seemed to hide their communistic/socialistic leanings. Ah well.

<><

[BushisTheMan]

Rather than withdraw, I would prefer that the UN be abolished. I'd hate to withdraw and allow the UN to vote without the US's veto vote.

[Two Dawgs]

Yep...kick them out of that building and make condos! Prime property!

[Rakkasan1]

I wrote my senator (the one who stays on the job)
, Norm Coleman about this 6 months ago. He said it would
be "unwise" to get out of the UN . I guess we need yet even
more proof they are corrupt and worthless.
I'll send him this anyway. It's fun to bang my head against
the wall...

[lilylangtree]

Heard a southern preacher sum it all up in one sentence: "Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US!"

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

Let's see... It's a quarter to three here in Texas... I think if they had it done by the top of the hour I could live with it.:-) We should hit our elected representatives with this as soon as they're sworn in in January...

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

You should have asked him what was so 'wise' about staying...

[Ginifer]

The United Nations has done nothing but divide the Nations. I agree, we should get out of the UN and form a new organization that actually does what it is supposed to do.

[watchout]

U.N oil-for-food program is directly responsible for the deaths of American soldiers.
And I personally believe that some of this money helped finance the terrorists to do 9-11.

The Korean war, Vietnam, the United Nations are responsible for the deaths of some Americans.

Why we give money and trade with communist and socialist countries is beyond me.

Read Olly North's new book which says Russia, China, France, Germany were selling weapons to Iraq even after President Bush gave orders to go into Iraq a little over a year ago.

I think they have put United Nation personel in command structure of our military, judges, and departments of U.S. governments that make sure we go by international laws.

[80sReaganite]

How about we leave the UN, throw all the diplomats with unpaid parking tickets in jail and turn the UN building into a "War on Terror" center headed by the new NID?

Let them relocate the UN to Paris, Berlin, or Moscow....

[watchout]

How about Freedom

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

For SURE we should NOT be giving foreign aid to ANYONE who votes against us there nor should we give ONE CENT to any UN administered program. EVER!



Off soapbox.:-)

[SittinYonder]

Without the U.S. a UN vote is meaningless. Who's going to enforce UN votes - France?

[cowboyway]

We only stand a chance of leaving the UN if GW is reelected.

http://www.getusout.org/

http://www.avlp.org/editorials/un1.html

And while we're at it, the red states (conservative, Bush states) need to secede and form a country that is based on the Constitution as written by the founding fathers, not this watered down version that the rats are trying to destroy.

http://www.secession.net/

http://christianexodus.org/

[retiredcpo]

I do not have the intellect or writing ability to put into words my complete and utter contempt for the Useless Nations. The sooner the US leaves this POS organization, the better.

[t-1000]

Only if I personally got to throw Annan's skinny rear out and onto the streets.
GWB should make a UN withdrawal a campaign issue. It would probably win him the election.

I dream of the day!

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

It would be far WORSE if sKerry is elected (but that ain't gonna happen!)

[el_texicano]

Damn straight!!!! Boot their arses out, asap.

[bubman]

here, here!!

[dljordan]

We don't own the property. It was given to the UN by Rockefeller.

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

POS sums it up very well in my mind. And you said you didn't have the words! Sandbagger!!:-)

[dljordan]

We don't need an organization to replace the UN. That's what ambassadors are for.

[erik22lax]

did not have to read the article to agree!!! The Salvation Army that costs the US taxpayers 25 billion

[Tailgunner Joe]

eminent domain.

[watchout]

I like that one

[watchout]

If you think the Oil for Food program is full of corruption just check into all the treaties we have signed with the United Nations.

For example, what has Russia been promised to sign the Kayto treaty?

They will be backed by France, Germany, and the European union to get into the world trade association.

We will have to buy emission credits from Russia and China to run our automobiles in America.

Congress is so easily lead by these treaties sometimes they won't even have votes on these treaties that they just have voice votes.

Now what I see is that these corporations are NGO's of the United Nations.

We hardly produce anything here anymore. So, the corporations will go by the treaty over in Europe than just a back door way to introduce their products into America with their Kayto tax.

[blitzgig]

Hell yeah!! I like it!!

[Arizona Carolyn]

I'd volunteer to go help them pack... especially if I could go through some of Kofi's financial records.

[watchout]

New World Order Rising? - Thoughts on the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/743512/posts?page=10

[DoughtyOne]

Very good synopsis. There are other very troubling problems with the U.N., that almost no none addresses.

NGOs (non governmental organizations) get their marching orders from the United Nations. These organizations draw up way more legislative and goals oriented materials for our government, than they should be allowed to. Once drawn up, much of this legislation is voted on by our Congress without so much as a good solid skim beforehand.

Most people think of U.N.E.S.C.O. as some benevolent agency that distrubuts food to children. Well, it does redistribute food donated to it (taking credit all the way), but it also dables in policy development. Goals for education are distributed by this U.N. agency. Those goals are looked upon as if the 'Ten Commandments from on high' by our nation's education department. The problem is, these goals couldn't be more destructive to the morals and values system most Americans take for granted. They are very problematic.

The I.C.C. which gets it's marching orders from the United Nations, defines human rights in some god awful ways. It's shocking some of the ideas these folks see as valid. Eventually, this agency will be able to levy all sorts of mahem in our direction. Compliance will follow, or trade sanctions and world-class edicts of sub-par ratings will impact nations whether members or not.

Other NGOs busy themselves with topics as varried as global environmental, legislative, legal, trade and even human rights protocols. Much of this stuff is little more than thinly veiled policies drawn up to neuter the goals or the very being of the United States. The U.N. is insanely jealous of the United States, because the United States is about the only nation strong enough and smart enough to tell the United Nations to go pound sand, when it is out of line.

The problem is, through NGO intervention, the United States is slowly declining less and less to the United Nation's globalogna.

Much of the new emphasis for global trade is United Nations and NGO driven. As we sign on to these suicidal pacts, our self determination is severely impacted.

We do not vote for the officers of the United Nations. We do not vote for NGO members. These are non-representative forms of governance.

The United Nations is a devious organization that is burrowing itself into the internal affairs of nations across the planet. As such it stands to be not just one of the worst, but 'the worst' form of governance every known to man. It will decide what nations can and cannot do. Those nation's citizens will be powerless to stop it.

As mentioned above, perhaps the most troubling aspect of the U.N., is it's passivity when it comes to terrorist states. Compounding this problem is it's tendency to damn nations who oppose terrorist states. Israel and the United States are the targets of it's wrath constantly. We may be able to ignore it's tirades today, but in the near future the U.N. and the NGOs will so firmly have ensconsed their devious plans, that we will not be about to any longer.

When that happens, Israel will land on the vivisection table first. The U.S. will shortly follow.

Don't laugh this off folks.

[backtothestreets]

I agree with the assessment for withdrawing from the UN. There may be a need for an international body where differences can be aired, but it should have no governing power.

I'd like to toss in an alternative. Give more credence to our Constitution. It has provisions for resolution between states. I wonder how many Americans are aware of grassroots efforts in foreign countries to join the United States. These can be found in Canadian Provinces, Australia, and Mexico. Few people realize President Fox of Mexico belongs to a political party (PAN) that has proposed having the northern states of Mexico join the United States to bring the rule of order and prosperity to those states. It would also reverse the immigration flight northward.

Too many people do not give our constitution its due worth. There are efforts in Congress from people as diverse as Senator Orin Hatch of Utah and Representative Barney Franks of Massachusetts to change our constitution to allow foreign born citizens, like Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to run for president. I'd say he would have that right if he could persuade his native country to join our nation. He would then be a full fledged American citizen.

I hope people take the time to see the potential our constitution offers to many issues. It offers a more substantial document for resolution between free states than the United Nations Charter.

[stompk]

"And while we're at it, the red states (conservative, Bush states) need to secede and form a country that is based on the Constitution as written by the founding fathers, not this watered down version that the rats are trying to destroy."

yeah. then, we can have a war, kick their @$$ and take back the rest of the land.

[rudypoot]

Just withdrawl our funding and operate only on the Security Council to hold our veto power. The rest of our activities should be done outside the UN with whoever wants to help us or wants our help. Our money + our equipment + our troops = our decision.

[backhoe]

My 2¢'s about the un?

American Policy Center on-line Declaration of Independence from the U.N.

As I recall, the un has one or more "contingency sites" located in other nations... let's banish them there--

Moreover:

 

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/679476/posts

U.N. Finally Forced to Probe Its Pedophilia Scandal
Newsmax.com ^ | Tuesday, May 7, 2002

"Imagine the screaming headlines and worldwide outrage if the Catholic Church or any other church allowed sexual abuse of children on such a massive scale. Could the media establishment's pro-U.N., anti-religious bias have anything to do with the stunning discrepancy? "

Child sex book given out at U.N. summit

UN cash for accused Nazi (Waldheim got 4,1 million)

'War Crimes' Fear For British Troops. Well, they wanted the World Court Didn't They?

And, the Mother of All Corruption & Scandals:

Click this picture & goto "last" for the latest:

massive sexual abuse of children in Africa,

[GW and Twins Pawpaw]

"Too many people do not give our constitution its due worth. There are efforts in Congress from people as diverse as Senator Orin Hatch of Utah and Representative Barney Franks of Massachusetts to change our constitution to allow foreign born citizens, like Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to run for president. I'd say he would have that right if he could persuade his native country to join our nation. He would then be a full fledged American citizen."



In my mind, those persons can run for President AFTER their former countries/provinces/states have joined the United States as NEW states. Then they won't need an amendment authorizing such behavior as they would be Americans and served by the Constitution in its present form.

[drypowder]

it (the UN) is so utterly corrupt that it needs to be eliminated entirely

This is turning out to be a real test to expose which of the US politicians will be proved truly patriotic. My congressman, Mike Thompson (D-CA, Yolo, Solano, Napa) told me in a reply letter that he believes in and supports the UN. According to the latest on the Oil for Food scam that has essentially caused the deaths of many Iraqis and US military personnel that makes Mike Thompson and any other US politician who supports the UN complicit with murderers, thieves and thugs.

[k2blader]

We most definitely should.

No politicians have the guts to do this, tho'.

[Brilliant]

Doubt it will happen. I remember when the Soviets withdrew from the Security Council, the US pushed thru the decision to send UN troops to South Korea. My guess is that we won't want to give up our veto. I'm not sure if we can withdraw from the General Assembly without withdrawing from the Security Council. If so, that might be a good idea.

[MeekMom]

true

[dubyain04jebin08and12]

Sounds a lot like a country preacher I know!

Not just from the pulpit, either, but in casual conversation too. In a recent conversation I had with him, I pointed out that he used a term that isn't necessarily a slur but isn't considered socially acceptable anymore. He responded without even blinking, "The double-A in NAACP don't stand for African-American, son."

[BushisTheMan]

What about Israel? Who would be there to vote against all the anti-Israel amendments the Muslim nations try to pass.

[SittinYonder]

If the U.S. leaves the UN, and takes a few of its bribed and coerced allies with it, the UN's votes simply don't mean a thing. I want the UN to be marginalized and meaningless. Let them take anti-Israeli votes, anti-US or anti-western votes - if the US and her allies leave the UN what does a vote mean?

[Conservative Infidel]

What became of the League of Nations? How did that corrupt institution die? How did we get out of that?

I agree, we don't want to unilaterally withdraw from the UN. If we did, all the remaining UN clowns would pass one resolution after another condemning the US and trying to figure out ways to confiscate our money.

[BushisTheMan]

I want the UN to be destroyed -- financially and politically. The US should significantly reduce their $ for the UN.

If Chirac is tied to his buddies who worked with Saddam, France should then be removed as a permanent member and replaced by a country like Poland or Italy. However, with Clinton's buddy Marc Rich as someone who also worked with Saddam, it might be difficult to achieve.

[Stellar Dendrite]

Bump

[Doctor Stochastic]

Kick them off our soil too!

Well, that's what the original idea was; the UN was supposed to be in Geneva. Wiser (or more devious) minds prevailed and (after much lobbying) the UN was headquartered in the US.

It's interesting to figure out why the US government thought it was a good idea to have the UN headquartered on US soil.

[Zionist Conspirator]

It's amazing how palaeoconservative Bush-haters (who agree with liberals that the US should not be acting alone) still claim to be anti-UN even though their behavior is anything but.

Oh well. They still think the UN is "Zionist" even though the enthusiastically call for implementation of the UN's anti-Israel resolutions.

[backtothestreets]

We're on the same page GW! This is the constitutional option already in place. I don't like the present discussions that would change our constitution.

Aside from the presidential question I'd hope people realize our constitution offers lasting resolution to the problems illegal immigration from Mexico presents. Roughly a third of our lower 48 states is comprised of what was once half of Mexico. If another quarter of Mexico, or all of Mexico moves to accept our rule of order presented by our constitution, it would bring such economic opportunity that migration northward would cease and reverse quickly. It is the constitutional way of acceptance into our nation.