Post User Polls

What is the most pressing issue facing the UN?

By Abha Bhattarai  |  September 22, 2010; 7:19 PM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Revelations in Woodward book 'Obama's Wars' | Next: Okay to take pets to crowded public events?


Please email us to report offensive comments.

The biggest issue for the U.N. is whether it serves any useful purpose whatsoever.

Posted by: millerroberta | September 22, 2010 8:30 PM

For decades the United Nations has done nothing to end the rule of dictators in many Nations. It has tolerated and even promoted dictators in it's own committees. Lunatics such as Kadafi are given equal time to spout their nonsense. Dictators that oppress the people of their Nations are considered as legitimate as the Leaders of responsible Nations. The United Nations has no relevance and no purpose other than to bash the United States and it's Allies. We need to create another world organization with higher standards for membership.

Posted by: bobbo2 | September 23, 2010 5:44 AM


Share a website with you ,

put this url in google sirch

( )

Believe you will love it.

We accept any form of payment

Posted by: erqwe80 | September 23, 2010 8:27 AM

The ability to make "member" countries adhere to agreements.

I don't see this happening without significant consequences. Writing a letter of condemnation to an act or a regime does nothing- sometimes less than nothing as it has caused negative results.

Iran's President should not be allowed to address the General Assemby, he should not be given any place at the international table until independent inspectors can check out their nuclear "power" plants.

Countries where there is significant eveidence of tribal genocide, should have their leadership arrested by a body in the UN and maintained until trials can be held in the Hague. The penalty for a guilty sentence is death.

Countries that do not adhere to the rights of women and children, the elderly and the handicapped and minority religions should have to invest, in a highly monitored way, investment in safety and enrichment for these groups.

If a country leaves membership because it does not want to heed the admonisments and punishments for malfeasance, all other nations hould shun that nation in terms of travel, trade, etc., save for the idea that refugees from those rogue states should have a safe haven established.

Murder, rape, drug trafficing- all should be death sentence offenses.

All death sentences passed by the Hague should be without possibility of appeal, and the sentences should be carried out in public.

Posted by: poppysue85 | September 23, 2010 10:40 AM

Illegal drugs and the revenues attached to them have wrecked the world economy.

The bad guys have altogether too many resources at their disposal and are disrupting peaceful life for the rest of us.

But since the bad guys are smart enough to give a cut of the action to anyone who might change this, they are unlikely to be challenged.

Look at Afghanistan, opium production leader of the world; remember Vietnam, and Burma the former world's leading producer of opium.

Golden triangles and golden crescents don't exist without our tacit approval.

Posted by: brng | September 23, 2010 11:13 AM

Ya' know, if the Swiss know anything, they know money.

They have legalized heroin, give prescriptions with prescribed clinic locations to users. Disallowed the associated crime that accompanies the illicit drug trade, in their nation.

Taxing and regulations the poison wrecking the world's economy is probably not a bad idea.

Posted by: brng | September 23, 2010 11:19 AM

Human Rights. The less the UN gets involved in, the better off we will be.

Posted by: moebius22 | September 23, 2010 12:04 PM

The most pressing issue facing the UN should be whether it should continue to exist.

It shouldn't.

Posted by: Robert2008 | September 23, 2010 12:19 PM

The UN need to reform itself such that it will represent the global community not such few superpowers and their allies. Under current rules in the security council, the UN is loosing legetimacy and loosing it fast....

Posted by: mgharib | September 23, 2010 12:27 PM

The Arab-Israeli conflict should not have been allowed to fester this long. The main reason for the delay is that most of the countries directly involved are either impotent or blinded by narrow selfish interests. What is needed is a powerful nation or nations that know what is right and act diligently and decisevly to achieve it.

Posted by: abrahamhab1 | September 23, 2010 12:41 PM

Justice for the Palestinian people, and the return of all that was stolen from them.

Posted by: Garak | September 23, 2010 1:34 PM


Share a website with you ,

put this url in google sirch

( )

Believe you will love it.

We accept any form of payment

Posted by: erqwe80 | September 23, 2010 8:27 AM


Posted by: Garak | September 23, 2010 1:39 PM

Who cares? Obama is on the front pages talking middle east peace and the GOP is talking domestic politics. Why aren't haven't the Dems figured out that the county cares about domestic issues right now - that is the focus of the mid-terms and that is why the Dems are losing.

I want Obama and Dems touting their economic plans, accomplishments - NOT talking about middle east peace - that isn't going to win them any votes.

Posted by: lifgard1 | September 23, 2010 3:09 PM

The UN needs to find something to do other than condemning Israel.

Posted by: ravitchn | September 23, 2010 6:50 PM

#1 priority for UN ?
I suggest reining in colonialism.
Things like the US invasion of Iraq.

Posted by: BrianX9 | September 23, 2010 10:31 PM

Congress voted today. House members are no longer "mentally retarded." Incumbents are now "individuals with an intellectual disability." Democratic spin doctors.

It is time to stop funding the UN.

Posted by: alance | September 23, 2010 11:52 PM

The UN's biggest most pressing issue is that permanent security council member nations such as the United States and the UK have as recently as March 2003 illegally (against the UN Charter) launched aggressive invasions.

That the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal is not a fringe or minority view. It was the view of Kofi Annan Secretary General of the UN at the time. It was the view of the other three permanent security council member nations (France, China, Russia). And indeed the view of most lawyers and objective commentators in the world at the time.

The whole point of the UN, the whole superstructure of the UN is erected upon a principle of collective security through strong nations upholding their word not to aggressively invade.

When aggressive invasions occur they carry with them necessarily unlawful loss of human life in the ensuing war.

With both the United States and the United Kingdom launching the invasion of Iraq illegally they undermined confidence in the UN as a hub of international law.

Until there is a lawful accounting for breaches by the likes of George W Bush and Tony Blair, there must inevitably remain the widespread view that the United States and the United Kingdom would again in future break the UN prohibition against agressive invasion if the leaders of those countries at the time think they can sell it or evade accountability domestically.

The UN's biggest problem is, as a result of Bush and Blair's legacy, that no one can now credibly believe that the rules (against aggressive invasion which occassion mass murder and the throwing over of other nations governments) apply evenly to everyone.

What follows on from that is that confidence in the rule of law between nations is seriously and fundamentally undermined. Frankly, confidence in the rule of law in the face of manifest unaccountability for obvious breaches of the highest importance is rationally impossible.

Posted by: BrettPaatsch1 | September 24, 2010 12:30 AM

The most pressing problem for the UN is its own corruption and those of its dictator members.

Posted by: LadyChurchillUSA | September 24, 2010 3:02 AM

I'd like the U.N. to develop a non-sexual, "universally" acceptable pronoun for the Creator. That would probably not be possible, but perhaps a set of pronouns that work within certain societies/languages. Discussing the sexuality of God is insane. If we're made in (uh-oh) His image and likeness, surely that refers to our having a soul.

Posted by: psst_limbaugh_keep-ranting_satan | September 24, 2010 3:22 AM

The most pressing issue facing the U.N. is to get its own house in order. What has the U.N done lately regarding preserving the peace, acting as the moral conscience of the international community, or bringing to heel the world’s most ruthless regimes and warlords? Not squat. Who, for example, would turn to the U.N. to put an end to the endless tribal warfare, carnage, and mass rape so endemic to Africa? The Secretary General was once at least taken seriously as the leading spokesman for the international community’s moral voice. Who today even know his name? Instead, the U.N. is like a zoo taken over by the animals. The most despicable and ruthless regimes and warlords are treated with deference and as equal to those who show respect for basic human rights. The U.N. has become a hollow shell of what it was supposed to be.

Posted by: tbarksdl | September 24, 2010 4:32 AM

Righties have been taught by Fox & Frightwing radio to hate the United Nations.
The hate escalated when the UN opposed Bush & Republicans rush to invade Iraq on the basis of non-existent WMD's and terrorists.
The UN was correct - and Righties have never admitted they were duped on Bush's IraK Scam that has cost us $2 TRILLION and the needless loss of our Finest.

I've learned the hard way - if you care about your life and your money, it's best to vote Democratic!

Posted by: angie12106 | September 24, 2010 6:20 AM

Israel's apartheid regime poses the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East...

Posted by: demtse | September 24, 2010 6:42 AM

I think clean drinking water, basic food, shelter and good sanitation are a must if disease is to be controlled.

Posted by: judyterry | September 24, 2010 6:53 AM

Disband this money sucking waste of bureaucratic freeloaders.

Posted by: logicprevails | September 24, 2010 7:16 AM

So what is it exactly that we expect from the UN? A World body to come together to resolve the major problems affecting the world? Judging by the way our government "works" with a gridlocked congress mired in partisanship and putrid to the core with the special interests money that, in the end is the power dictating law and policy for their benefit.

You go and compare!

Posted by: likovid | September 24, 2010 7:29 AM

The U.N. has been and is a monumental waste. They don't seem to be trying to make a difference and one has to wonder if they ever will. It's only value is to employ the unemployable. Does anyone else wonder what the total cost is to accomplish nothing?

Posted by: Illinois4 | September 24, 2010 7:32 AM




US House puts Our oceans, coasts under UN with the CLEAR Act (HR 3534):

Senate vote will seal the deal, this horrendous bill puts U.S. Coastlines, Oceans and even the Great Lakes under the rule of international law controlled by the UN. There is also a nefarious provision which sneaks in a $2 per barrel of oil tax hike as a result of the fallout over the BP Gulf Oil Spill and also makes US pay $900 million per year until 2040 as part of the deal to forfeit Our sovereignty...

READ MORE,_coasts_under_UN:_Senate_vote_will_seal_the_deal.html

Posted by: AJAX2 | September 24, 2010 7:51 AM

we will continue to have war as long as our global society stresses competition over cooperation.

the competition model we currently use to determine how assets and resourceses are diseminated is failing more miserably with each passing day. not enough necessities and currency are being distributed, while far too much is being accumulated - causing the 'need' for more security measures. this unequal distribution is the reason for the massive 'serge in security measures' of all of kinds all around the globe. this is basic human instinct we are looking at here. when some are lacking enough to survive and they see others have excesses, measures are taken by those in need to gain access to excesses, while those hoarding the excesses take measures to protect them - so they can get through 'lean times' w/o adjusting.

this is a viscious, self-sustaining cycle that will not end without purposeful change. it's going to take a 'change in consciousness'. the sooner we change to a global cooperative model of distribution, the sooner we can end all these stupid conflicts and 'alpha male posturing' and protection of excessses by armed means that now dominates the global political landscape.

our next step in evolution is not one of genetic adaptation - it is an elevating step in consciousness.
a step, only humans are capable of.

so when can we drop all this posturing and competitive nonsense and get on with our evolution?

there really is plenty of 'stuff' to go around. if we reallocate our energy and focus it on distribution, rather than acumulation and securing stockpiles, we could get necessities to everyone currently in pure survival mode.

remember folks, it was by chance you ended up in the body in which you currently reside. you could have ended up in a body born in the congo or rawanda or india. how do you think you'd feel about the distribution model v. the accumulation model if those were your circumstances?

we are all in this together. the sooner we realize it and start acting like it, the better off we'll ALL be.

no individual or group has any more 'right to life' than another. we need to focus on the people who are already breathing here on planet earth.

Posted by: boblesch | September 24, 2010 9:17 AM

Shut it down. We the USA subsize tyrants and thier ilk and they just continue to dump on us.
A waste of money and time.

Posted by: commonsense70 | September 24, 2010 9:36 AM

Shut it down. We the USA subsize tyrants and thier ilk and they just continue to dump on us.
A waste of money and time.

Posted by: commonsense70 | September 24, 2010 9:37 AM

The UN has several issues it prefers to deal with excluding the real issues.
Un Human Rights Group has no interest in Human Rights.
Their mission is to destry Israel and make the US look foolish.
Burma, North Korea, China and the Sudan are of no interest to them.
The UN Third World members are mostly interested in how much money they can extort and the Europeans like to make long meaningless speeches that the rest of the world ignores.
If the 9/11 bombers really wanted to make a statement they would have left the Twin Towers alone and bombed the UN

Posted by: mimelc | September 24, 2010 9:39 AM

The biggest issue for the United Nations is it's creditability and lack there of....

Posted by: leo25 | September 24, 2010 11:17 AM

The UN is basically worthless. The majority of its members are not democracies so who do they represent? At best it is a debating society pretending to be a parliament.

Posted by: Desertstraw | September 24, 2010 12:29 PM

The most pressing issue of the UN has always been self-preservation of its vast bureaucracy.

Posted by: vismorge | September 24, 2010 12:31 PM

Religious Tolerance

Most of the unnecessary ills on this planet arise from religious intolerance and resulting war and strife.

Posted by: oldmagnolia | September 27, 2010 9:49 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company