There hasn't been a single world war since the founding the United Nations. From this...

There hasn't been a single world war since the founding the United Nations. From this, can it be said that the United Nations was a resounding success?

Attached: united-nations-hi.jpg (1000x667, 225K)

There hasn’t been a single witch since the Salem witch trials
Could it be said that the Salem trials succeeded?

>world war
no such thing

It's a piece of shit lead by the first world countries leaving the rest of the countries to talk and be proud of belong in a non existent democratic world organisation.

Yes

League of Nations 2.0: this time, in addition to doing nothing, it wastes vast amounts of time, money, and effort!

>lead by the first world countries

If this were true, it would be much better.

Unfortunately, Hitler fucked up the world so badly that we had to put Russia and China on the Security Council and let Africans into the General Assembly.

I think nowadays it's more global free trade stopping it than anything else.

This, everyones kinda dependent on someone. The whole system collapses if even secondary powers like iran and saudi arabia were to go to war directly.

It probably has more to do with Democratic Theory than the UN although they're closely related.

The UN has a pretty shit record, but it's done some good in mitigating conflicts.

Anita sarkeesian spoke before the UN to ask them to start censoring the internet because they get bullied
The UN is a joke

It's nukes.

Well the point of the UN is to make the small countries feel relevant while the big guys, the Security Council of USA, France, UK, Russia and China decide everything.

World War is stopped by the existence of nukes, not the UN, EU or whatever continental project you can think up of.

The WHO does lots of things though.

>There hasn't been a single world war since the founding the United Nations. From this, can it be said that the United Nations was a resounding success?
No. WWIII has been avoided due to Mutual Assured Destruction.

Nevertheless, the UN has some agencies and programs that have been very succesfull. Smallpox sucks.

The UN has failed to keep the peace. That was its main objective, but it never had the means to do so. On the other hand, it does a lot of useful things. We need to keep it, while acknowledging its limitations.

>Smallpox sucks.
The eradication of viruela is the single greatest achievement of mankind, and pretty soon Polio shall be detroyed too (it could have been eliminated by now already, but the f*cking amerilards had to fuck shit up again).

There's been two world wars since the invention of the light bulb
Light bulbs were a mistake

No, When the majority of the world (first world countries) prefer the status quo, you won't have a world war.

United Nations is mostly just good at bitching about things and that's it.

Nuclear warheads and ICBMs success are a resounding success

You mispelled NATO

The impact of nukes is heavily overstated. Especially after the US learned the gap between them and Russia in nuclear power

If Russia and China and other nations in Africa and Asia are affected by the UN they 100% should have a say in it.