15 replies to this topic

[AztecInca]

Debate Topic: Is the UN an important world organisation that makes a significant difference to the people of this world, or a meaningless organisation that nations merely pay lip-service to?

We are looking for two particpants. One to debate that the UN is an important and effective organisation and the other to debate that it is simply not important, effective or necessary.

The position that the UN is an important and effective organisation is once again free for any who wish to take part in this debate.

Edited by AztecInca, 01 August 2006 - 09:40 AM.

[bennyclive]

I will debate that the UN is simply not important, effective or necessary.

That is if you don't mind someone who has debated before but is a newbie to this forum jumping in here.

[AztecInca]

^That's fine bennyclive, all are welcome to debate here on UM

A participant will be debating that the UN is an important and effective organisation, while bennyclive is debating that the UN is not important, effective or necessary.

This is a 1v1 formal debate.

It will consist of an Introduction, 5 bodily posts and a conclusion from each participant. No Flaming, bad manners or profantities will be tolerated. Please make sure you quote ALL your sources!

Please be aware that:

There is a point deduction for debaters who fail to make a post within the 7 day time frame. The deductions will be 2 points for every day the participant fails to post after the 7 days.

This is to ensure that debates continue in a timely fashion. If for any reason you cannot post within the 7 days, please ensure that you let myself or Tiddlyjen know to avoid having the points taken off your debate.

If, however the participant does not then attempt to make a post for up to 2 weeks after the 7 day rule has started an immediate disqualification will occur.

Good luck!

Edited by AztecInca, 05 June 2006 - 11:21 AM.

[bennyclive]

First, thanks to AztecInca for hosting this and good luck to Death Star III.

Introduction

(1)  “More than ever before in human history, we share a common destiny. We can master it only if we face it together. And that, my friends, is why we have the United Nations.” Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General, in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech 2001.

I could not agree more. In today's world everyone is in some way dependant on the outcomes of world events and as such we do share a common destiny. Thanks to world trade your job, wherever you live and whatever you do, is almost certainly dependant on the world market staying stable which is dependant on world confidence and world events. And now terrorism shows us that we cant even ensure our own safety by just keeping to ourselves. So surely in all this confusion the United Nations is not just an important organisation but an essential organisation if we want to face these problems together and make the world safe. And, as its importance is surely obvious to anyone involved then naturally everyone will do everything they can to make sure it is an effective organisation, right?

I don't think so. In fact I am going to suggest that so far the United Nations has not only failed to deliver the goals set out in its charter but, because of its poor record, its institutional problems and the conflicts that exist between its goals and those of its members it is unlikely to ever deliver the goals it set itself.

But don't worry I am not about to suggest we all start redigging the Cold War's nuclear bunkers and prepare for an inevitable WW3 or great depression mark 2. I do still agree with Kofi Annan's view that we have the UN so that we can face our "common destiny" together. The UN may have the theoretical potential to succeed but it is not meeting its potential and, fortunately, there are many other ways in which in which we can peacefully pursue our "common destiny" that don't require the UN. In fact many of these ways already have proven value, with institutions such as the WTO and the World Bank brokering international deals independently of the UN.

In other words I believe the UN's history will show that it is ineffective, the abundance of other solutions to world issues will show that it is unnecessary and (just in case something can be ineffective and unnecessary but important) the attitudes of some world figures and organisations will show that it is not important.

Or to quote John Bolton, USA's Permanent Representative to the UN. (2) "There's no such thing as the United Nations. If the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn't make a bit of difference"

[AztecInca]

Death Star III has pulled out of all his debates and so a new participant must be found to debate that the UN is an important and effective organisation. When found this participant will get right to it and post their Introduction.

Edit: I had cleaned up this thread and have removed your last post bennyclive as you requested.

Edited by AztecInca, 06 June 2006 - 12:28 AM.

[Poseidon3012]

I will debate that the U.N. is important.

[AztecInca]

Thank-you Poseidon3012. I will just confirm that bennyclive can still compete, once that is done you may post your introduction.

[Poseidon3012]

Introduction

It is believed by many people that we control our own destiny. That we can control what can happen tomorrow and the next day, etc. Human destiny is not an individual thing. It is not something that can be controlled solely by one man nor one nation. To control our own destiny, we need the world's help. And what other organization is perfect for the job rather than the U.N.? This organization was forged after the aftermath of WWII. It was created so that nations wouldn't go to war against each other. Later in its lifetime, the U.N. gave itself the responsibility to be the defender of human rights. Of course, the U.N. isn't perfect, and so was its history, but if we give it a chance, it can prove to be a driving force not only in the war against terrorism, but also in the war to control our own destiny.

[AztecInca]

Obviously bennyclive is unable to compete and with my inability to access UM over the last 2 weeks due to a very malicious virus that coincided with my resumption of University I have been unable to find a replacement.
The position that the UN is not important, effective or necessary is again open for any interested.

[AtlantisRises]

I will give it a go if it is possible to ignore benny clives opening statements

[behaviour???]

please let me give a try???

[Rosewin]

Two years later...

[Bill Hill]

Rosewin on Oct 30 2008, 03:33 PM, said:

Two years later...

Bit like the real UN...

[Tiggs]

universal legend on Oct 30 2008, 02:14 PM, said:

please let me give a try???

I think you're a little late, Universal Legend.

The UM debating system has changed - rather than debate organisers pitching debate ideas, you can now challenge someone to a debate about a topic directly.

[She-ra]

Bill Hill on Nov 1 2008, 09:52 AM, said:

Bit like the real UN...

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!! Bill