Where would the leaders of the world’s bitter, disgruntled, America-hating nations go if there were no United Nations?
Gee, they’d be sorta homeless, wouldn’t they?
Remember, this is an organization that puts countries such as Cuba and Saudi Arabia on its Human Rights Council. Perhaps such nations are on that council as negative examples for other states to study…
Though that seems unlikely.
The UN is a convenient target for those who oppose a globalist agenda, yet it is a target against which criticism is justified.
Its accomplishments are few and its failures many. It’s merely an exercise in spreading socialism on a worldwide scale, with the United States expected to be the source of funding.
Yeah, well, maybe not. President Trump’s plans to cut funding for the UN naturally has exponents of this globalist institution in a rage, but the White House is pushing forward:
Writing in the establishment standard bearer Foreign Affairs, Colum Lynch sounds the alarm.
“State Department staffers have been instructed to seek cuts in excess of 50 percent in U.S. funding for U.N. programs, signaling an unprecedented retreat by President Donald Trump’s administration from international operations that keep the peace, provide vaccines for children, monitor rogue nuclear weapons programs, and promote peace talks from Syria to Yemen, according to three sources.”
There’s quite a bit of talk about peace in that statement for a world that seems to have PLENTY of war.
Are we to believe that a cut in funding by the US will lead to more war, that the solution to world conflicts would be found if the US would just increase the amount of cash it sends to the UN?
That would seem to be the implication, and probably the unspoken desire.
Why did Lynch not state “prevent rogue nations from obtaining nuclear weapons?” That should be the real goal, right? Of course we know the answer:
Like most UN programs, its “monitoring” of rogue nations is useless, and it certainly cannot stop such nations from arming themselves however they wish.
This is why Trump doesn’t think too highly of the UN and if he wants to, say, go after our enemies in Palestine, he will do exactly that.
The entire Foreign Policy piece is an exercise in fear-mongering with the goal of attacking the Trump administration while trying to sound sophisticated and thoughtful. So what else is new, liberals?
And the part about all the kids who will die because they will go without vaccines without money from the US flowing to the UN? We have a hunch that if an international organization, or a country for that matter, asked us for help in vaccinating their kids, we would respond positively.
Of course, that would deprive the UN of the one program in its repertoire that might actually do something positive.
Source: Foreign Policy