Agreed, but the sequence of events needs to be: cut off funding first, and push the UN offshore to some other country. Let it shrivel into irrelevance, and THEN exit on the grounds that it no longer has any purpose. Retain our veto until the UN can no longer cause any significant harm. If we bail out first, the UN will still have a few years of influence before it collapses, and could wreak much havoc without the US participating.
Such an abrupt departure might also prompt some other major power to step in and try to keep it afloat, such as the EU apparatus in Brussels, or Russia, or even some of the Middle Eastern monarchies. Granted that they wouldn’t be able to keep it going for very long, but they might be able to run it long enough to really foul things up, especially for Israel.
The UN has long tried to assert jurisdiction over the non-territorial areas of the ocean. Imagine a UN treaty, agreed to by all remaining members minus the US (or at least the major members), granting Russia exclusive control of the Arctic ocean, and China full authority over the entire South China Sea (and then some). If all the rest of the world more or less agrees to it, how could we gainsay it short of military conflict?
Very good points...wish it could develop that way..
As long as there are democrats in the office of the president and our ambassadors to the UN are from those administrations, we and Israel will never get a fair shake. They never run out of flunkies...We saw them in Clinton’s administration and lo and behold, they are still on the scene performing duties they were never hired to do and all chomping at the bit to become relevant again in another Clinton administration. Hopefully, that will never happen!!!!