[mmccarroll]

I'm not sure that it's time to close the book on the UN - I'm not even sure we could do it, they seem to have too strong a hold on the world's collective brain to allow anyone to extricate themselves. But it's always fun to point out the UN's shortcomings. Sort of like shooting fish in a barrel is fun.

[RoadTest]

"I'm not sure that it's time to close the book on the UN"

Then when?

[aberaussie]

Frankly, I think the problems with the UN are inherent in that sort of organization. A new organization would most likely be just more of the same. People are people, power corrupts and all that.

[Reaganesque]

I'm with the author of the article. I really can't think of a single useful thing they do. It is a cesspool of political corruption that is more a hinderance to world peace than a help. Get rid of it.

[BenLurkin]

The U N can and should be closed.

As foer what should take its place -- nothing would probably be the best.

[kjo]

First, remove the US from the UN and the UN from the US. As an international peace keeper, the UN is worthless.

Second, replace the UN by a group of like minded democracies. Perhaps the NATO nations are a place to start.

Third, announce to the terrorist supporting nations that if they continue allowing groups to attack the democracy loving nations of the world this new organization will come after them. Saddam was just the beginning.

It's going to be a fifty year campaign. We might as well hunker down and begin.

[MichiganConservative]

Why don't we just try it and see what they do? What will they do? invade?

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Here's the legitimate "world organization" that we need...

This one below probably would not be so good...

[AnnAdoringFan]

we should pull the plug on the money... kick them out of our country... and form an association of free market republics.

[Vaquero]

Dump the UN first....nature, abhorrent of a vacuum will fill in the blanks.

[Non-Sequitur]

I can understand dumping the UN but why would we want to replace it?

[hedgetrimmer]

Time to Create a Legitimate World Organization

Ah utopia! NOT.

[wideawake]

There is no need for a UN or any other world organization.

In the future, as in the past and just like today, important global initiatives will be undertaken by great powers in order to achieve their policy goals.

The UN is a joke, as is any other organization which pretends that geopolitical decisionmaking authority can come from any other source than military or financial power.

[Defiant]

I've been saying this for 4 years, and so have many others. My view is that only the opinions of democratic regimes are worthy of respect. The votes of nations that are dictatorships are simply reflective of the will of one person, or a small subset of the people of one nation, and therefore do not represent the beliefs of that nation.

The true world body should be the "League of Free Peoples". The views of this body might be worthy of respect. No resolution of a body of dictators should carry any weight.

The League of Free Peoples could perhaps have a "Chamber of Dictators", where they allow the representatives of dictatorships to spout their views, and sometimes there is merit to hearing what they have to say. But they would not be allowed to participate in the debate on resolutions and policy.

That would be an organization that we might not always agree with, but which we could at least give consideration to.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

How you can you have a legitimate world organization when most world governments are run by criminals?