International intervention

Can international organisations like UN actually stop armed conflict in countries like Africa or NK? Their strategy so far seems to have been just to apply sanctions but that's doing pretty much nothing especially in regards to the Norks

Other urls found in this thread:

un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>people fight for resources
>I know let's RESTRICT THEIR RESOURCES
>that'll stop the fighting!

There's enough food for everyone, enough land, resources. The problem is the (((hogs))).

Even in peacekeeping operations though, you have peacekeepers going into third world shitholes like Malaysia every few years to make some arrests and confiscate some weapons before it all repeats a year or two later
It just seems like they can't do anything long term without going full burger and occupying the region

UN only exists to launder money and traffick people.

So, no.

Any sources/evidence for this besides just cynicism?

>peacekeeping
what an oxymoron. maybe just maybe, societies that live in such a way cannot be educated, and walls should be built so that only the more educated people can cross. sending armed foreigners into "their" area will always be seen as provocation. Always.

No, just reading between the lines.

Africa tripling in population in 20 years and then the population getting pushed into Europe isn't an accidental coincidence.

Americans can't go a day without lying and then believing their lies.

Hollywood was a mistake.

U.N. operations have mainly been used to advance underdeveloped nations, and create an open forum to interlink nations into easier diplomacy.

I see your game.

I do personally feel the UN should absolutely make a statement tomorrow.

It is a coincidence, you skitzophrenic.

Maybe petition your government to stop smuggling billions of dollars into the hands of warlords to cause destabilization in the region so we can operate more effectively in creating a functional nation for Africans.

Governments and international corporate governmental entities like the EU exist to protect the elite from us, and to keep the poor helpless.

All this bullcrap about "being deeply concerned about human welfare" is a big smokescreen

Friendly reminder: The truth is right in front of us

For what? I worked with the U.N. for years, and in it's bureacracy. We recieve funding for objective goals and operations that have one end game.

Not once has our resources been in the benefit of one nation. We offer humanitarian care, that is it.

There are global goals based on the health and peace on this planet, but the only way to ever have these come in place is when nations sit down and actually discuss it. The U.N. offers the diplomatic lines for this. We can't force any nation to step down, we don't have the authority.

NATO has more global influence then we did.

Skitzophrenia.

The only way the Un can do anything significant is if it goes full fascist and does make some NWO nightmare, otherwise it is nothing more than just a overpaid grandma telling everyone to play nice

the U.N cant even stop israel from bombing U.N schools. happened 4 times none of which were even in the same year

the entire point of the U.N was to stop super powers from being able to fight each other. 5 countries given permanent seats they cant fight each other or the attacker gets kicked out and loses the permanent seat.

permanent seats have veto power. the seats were given to those on the allies side in WW2 (not counting germanys tie breaking vote) but not much time needed to pass to force them to be on different sides

if america goes to war the brits go to war. same for russia and china. this means you end up with the first one to attack to lose their seat and a demand for a vote on a intervention happens its blocked by the ally but for example america can only fight 1 of the 2 major enemies so if the brits try to start a fight with the other they lose everything since germany can only cast one in the event of a tie and cant veto. america and the brits end up fighting the rest of the world and the U.N has a military

its designed to stop a large scale war which it has

>It is a coincidence, you skitzophrenic.

Totally. So was the attempted zika correction.

UN
>mostly does "peacekeeping"
and needs host country concent and set of rules

they use volunteered troops from mostly:
India, Pakistan, & China

>from UN military training exercises (twice)
they teach you to be an utterly ineffective pussy!!!

not intervene in genocide, but instead place your self between victims and attackers...only then can you use "self defence"

don't stop food convoy stealing or raid, hand it over... we'll get more, and it will be sold at market for reduced prices making food easyer to get.

>utter cucks, I'm glad US doesn't volunteer "peacekeepers" only aids in training theirs.

We don't have that authority.

Nor are we a payed grandma to tell anyone to play nice.

We HOPE they play nice, but our peacekeepers only replace military and police forces disposed at the time to maintain order in civilian populations. Even then, we don't maintain the law, we generally just supply transport for humanitarian supplies such as food and clothes.

Skitzophrenia.

The only people stopping us from putting a motion forth to sanction Israel is America, and you voted against the person that was willing to do that.
Again, even then, I doubt anything would happen.

So if you really did work with the UN, have they ever actually made peace in an armed region through talking with local governments/NGOs etc or is it literally just shipping in food and supplies as you said?

What are you describing as peace?

Peace comes when a government submits to an opposing force.

We will generally aid the party that upholds the Geneva Convention and doesn't not authorize Crimes against Humanities

So have we effectively created peace? When theres a situation such as an occupation of a village, and the government moves out to go deal with a warlord (i.e. Central Africa) we will fill the void for authority allowing humanitarian AID (Christian Volunteers, UNICEF, and other NGOs) to bring supplies in. We defend the supply routes, as well as defend from a retaliatory strike to steal supplies.

If we aren't there to defend the towns, and we leave, either warlords or mobs destroy the villages and slaughter to steal supplies

had to help them evacuate when the syrian civil war started.philipine faggots with azure helmets

Reminder that you're living on stolen land
un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

what about you?

Aren't we all?