Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: jttmab who wrote (121460)	12/13/2003 5:53:05 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) of 281500

As I said in the earlier post, I believe that the veto power of the permanent members is a significant obstacle and the veto power should be abolished [I won't hold my breath]. And I'm sure you want to abolish the US Senate as well because it's not elected according to proportion of population... The permanent memberships exist to prevent a tyranny by the non-democratic members of the UN.. I can agree that it was not helpful that totalitarian regimes were given two of those permanent seats, but that's in the past. I think permanent seats should go to those who provide the majority of the financial and diplomatic support for the UN. Because it's hardly fair to let corrupt and non-democratic regimes to dictate how such money is spent.. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next