The UN

[nudger1964]

I agree the world is extremely messed up in lots of places.

I guess I just find it difficult to be dispassionate about these things, inaction in the face of genocide etc. arouses my contempt and I feel strongly that something should at least be attempted to try and stop it whenever it occurs. I'm not an expert in international affairs and such, so my arguments will obviously have holes in them, but I try to stick to my principles as much as I can.

I would be curious to know if you guys agree with me in principle? I.e: that the international community should do all it can to prevent genocide, to bring war criminals to justice etc. I strongly believe that principle, but I understand that there are practical issues with interventionism. If you agree with the principle, but disagree with interventionism, what course of action do you think is best?

I dont think anyone with any moral fibre with argue against your principles on that.
I just dont think a military wing of the UN would be a good thing even if it were feasible.
Often the nationalities of the troops is an important factor in facilitating a peace keeping force in a particular region.
If you want to do something about Syria, that would have to come from the arab world. The UN can provide a legal framework for action they could take, but thats all it can do. It relies on its members to provide brute force when required, and thats the only realistic approach considering the complexities of regional disputes

 

[bluejatheist]

I agree the world is extremely messed up in lots of places.

I guess I just find it difficult to be dispassionate about these things, inaction in the face of genocide etc. arouses my contempt and I feel strongly that something should at least be attempted to try and stop it whenever it occurs. I'm not an expert in international affairs and such, so my arguments will obviously have holes in them, but I try to stick to my principles as much as I can.

I would be curious to know if you guys agree with me in principle? I.e: that the international community should do all it can to prevent genocide, to bring war criminals to justice etc. I strongly believe that principle, but I understand that there are practical issues with interventionism. If you agree with the principle, but disagree with interventionism, what course of action do you think is best?

I think most people would like it if there were a way for all the 'bad guys' to get their asses kicked in Rambo-esque glory. I sort of lost that when reading through books such as the Big Book of Horrible Things and realizing how massive genocides and wars have been a practical norm for history. The reason you aren't going to see something like this happen is because people of your moral caliber are the minority.

I imagine this somewhat like the Titanic perhaps, we have the lifeboats but we don't know for sure whether going back in force to save as many in the water as we can will sink us or swamp us altogether and end up with even more dead.