[Southack]

"I happen to think that.....If the U.S.A. pulled out of the U.N. the U.N. would cease to exist. Thus making your argument moot. I could be wrong....But I would sure like to be proven wrong. : )"

Walking around unarmed (i.e. without a UN veto) in the world doesn't make crime (i.e. the UN) go away.

You want the UN gone. I want the UN gone.

The difference between us is that you are willing to *gamble* that giving up our UN veto (all that really changes if we leave the UN) will make the UN go away, whereas I want the UN dead and gone BEFORE I let go of that UN veto.

Better to veto everything at the UN to grind that place to a halt, than to gamble that leaving the UN will end the nonsense there.

Keep in mind that the U.S. once signed the Kyoto Treaty and the treaty for the International Criminal Court before President Bush wisely pulled us out of both monsters, yet even so, those coalitions of nations haven't collapsed without the U.S.

Gambling that the withdrawal of the U.S. from the UN would have a *different* result than what happened to the ICC and Kyoto goes beyond risky...it's a clear loser of a policy idea.

[Osage Orange]

You take the U.S.A.'s money out of the U.N. and the U.N. would die....

The U.N. isn't a country....although some liken it to one....Those groups of nations you have mentioned aren't doing too much without the U.S.A. either, are they?

You can call it what you want..."gamble", "loser of an idea"...I happen to think that would be the quickest way to see the end of the U.N.

Will it happen? I doubt it...They/We will probably putz around doing it "your way"...and it will be more of the same, same as it ever was.

FWIW-