Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Security Council

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Poll Question: Who do you support for a position in the security council
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
3 [16.67%]
5 [27.78%]
8 [44.44%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
0 [0.00%]
1 [5.56%]
1 [5.56%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Gubook Janggoon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired Global Moderator

Joined: 08-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2187
  Quote Gubook Janggoon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Security Council
    Posted: 10-Dec-2004 at 21:12
As you all probably know, a few countries are vying for seats on the permanent security council.  Who do you support and why?  I'm thinking India because they are a rising power. 


Edited by Gubukjanggoon
Back to Top
Murph View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 28-Nov-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 319
  Quote Murph Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Dec-2004 at 21:57

india is the second largest country in the world, is predicted to be the largest in like 30 years, and has (i think) the 3rd largest military in the world

this definitely merits a position on the security council

Back to Top
Tobodai View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
  Quote Tobodai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Dec-2004 at 23:21
India , yes, better global represntation.  South Africa dn Japan will never get on the security council if I have anything do do about it!
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 08:29
All of them.
or even better: none of them and get rid of the old permanent seats and vetoes (sp?) as well.
Back to Top
Cywr View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
  Quote Cywr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 10:38
What MixT said, idealy we want a reform of the present system.
If it had to be just one, i'd go with Japan, as they contribute the second most to the UN budget.
Arrrgh!!"
Back to Top
babyblue View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1174
  Quote babyblue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 11:33
    i voted none...there's enough already. there was only intented to be five nations-Britain, France, China, Russia and the US. why do we need more? japan and germany? never...like the UN was created partially because of them...and Cywr..i don't think you can bribe your way in...
Back to Top
Cywr View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
  Quote Cywr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 11:39
Its not a matter of bribing your way in, its a matter of having some clout to counter the economic mismanagement that takes place in the UN.
Arrrgh!!"
Back to Top
babyblue View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1174
  Quote babyblue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 11:45
       what does the economic mismanagement within the UN has anything to do with japan making the second largest contribution therefore it's entitled to a seat?
Back to Top
Cywr View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
  Quote Cywr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 11:54
Its gives the people who provide the bulk of the funds more leverage. They are not going to oppose funding for vacination programs and the like, but they sure as hell will be more demanding when it comes to stuff like this food-for-oil fiasco.
Arrrgh!!"
Back to Top
babyblue View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1174
  Quote babyblue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 12:00

      ok...i see what you mean... then let the existing nations make the decision on how the money's spent then....like...if i donate to the salvation army or something, i don't expect them to give me a position in their organisation so that i can be part of the decision making process on how my money's gonna be spent. if i don't like what they're doing with my money, i won't donate to them..simple as that...though this might be a pretty extreme example....but you know what i mean.



Edited by babyblue
Back to Top
Gubook Janggoon View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired Global Moderator

Joined: 08-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2187
  Quote Gubook Janggoon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 13:28
Would the five permanent members ever give up their seats?  Is it realistic to think of abolishing the permanent seats?  
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 14:56
Originally posted by babyblue

japan and germany? never...like the UN was created partially because of them...

60 years ago, yes...

Japan and Germany (especially Germany) are completely different countries now compared  what they were 60 years ago. You can't keep them out of the security counsil because of that.

Why not keep France out because of the Napoleonic wars?
Back to Top
Serge L View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Italy
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 485
  Quote Serge L Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 16:25

I'd add all of them and even more . . . but abolish the veto power.

Sure, it would be difficult to convince the present 5 permanent members to give-up their veto -- yet it's not such an impossible task -- they do realize that that paralyzes the UNSC.

Somebody proposed a moratoria of the veto, at least for a certain time and/or for certain subjects, just to get everyone accustomed to the idea.

 

Back to Top
JanusRook View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419
  Quote JanusRook Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 18:07
Nobody does what the UN says anyway so does it even really matter who's on the security council.
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.

Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 21:10
Yeah, isn't that the truth.  I'm waiting for them to fall apart like the League of Nations, I bet it'll occur during a big war.  Or if they try to sanction a really powerful country like Russia or India.
Member of IAEA
Back to Top
babyblue View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 06-Aug-2004
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1174
  Quote babyblue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2004 at 23:56

Originally posted by MixcoatlToltecahtecuhtli



Why not keep France out because of the Napoleonic wars?

      because the U.N weren't formed right after the Napoleonic wars...and France was a founding member of the U.N. So i think the case is rather different.

Back to Top
coolstorm View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Nov-2004
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
  Quote coolstorm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2004 at 09:06

"Japan and Germany (especially Germany) are completely different countries now compared  what they were 60 years ago. You can't keep them out of the security counsil because of that."

That would be true for Germany but wrong for Japan. The Japanese government has shown no regret for what it did in WW2 while, on the other hand, Germany has apologized formally to the invaded countries.

Japan, up to this point, is trying to cover up by changing the content in its history books.

They have never apologized to any countries or people they invaded. The military spending of Japan is also second largest in the world, showing its aggression. Japan is an aggressive nation by nature. They are also cunny like a smiling wolf.

In Japan, young people are not taught that Japan invaded other countries. They are taught that Japan helped its neighbors get rid of Western and American Imperialism and joined the fight.

I voted for Germany.

But none of the old permanent members will allow the new comers to have veto power. The new comers can either be permanent members without veto power or temporary members with temporary veto power. These are the two options being discussed now. Due to historical reasons, China and all East Asian countries such as N and S Koreas will never let Japan be a permanent security council member with veto power.

Out of my curiosity, why is Nigeria on the list?



Edited by coolstorm
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2004 at 09:13
Originally posted by coolstorm

Out of my curiosity, why is Nigeria on the list?


They've asked for a security counsil seat. It's the most populous African country (more that 100 million inhabitants)
Back to Top
coolstorm View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Nov-2004
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1066
  Quote coolstorm Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2004 at 09:23

"They've asked for a security counsil seat. It's the most populous African country (more that 100 million inhabitants)"

indonesia also has over 100 million inhabitants. it's not on the list because of its poor economy and lack of power.

nigeria is a poor country afterall although it is relatively less poor compared to other african nations.

i dun think it can be a permanent member due to its lack of power and influence on the global stage.

it does not have a strong military to carry out un operations. it doesn't have the budget to support anything. it doesn't have the technology. it doesn't have a strong economy.

why is it on the list? italy, canada, australia, korea, indonesia, argentina should all be considered proir to nigeria. no offense to nigerians.



Edited by coolstorm
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2004 at 10:03
I think people want to see an African country represented in the UNSC. Out of all African countries, Nigeria is the best choice, although it has many flaws.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.117 seconds.