Calls are growing for the UN Security Council to be reformed after the US became the only member to use its veto power to block a Gaza ceasefire resolution, a move welcomed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The UN chief says he will keep pushing for peace.

  • Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    We already had world leaders tweeting their opinions at other, but they still meet in person to discuss issues and form agreements.

    A structured system is necessary when you have meetings with representatives for nearly every person on the planet

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Instead of replying with that same comment again, why don’t you explain what alternative you have in mind. Don’t just vaguely mention ‘packets’

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh I am sorry I wasn’t aware that I had to come up with a solution if I point out the current solution isn’t working. Shit. Better say nothing ever again and just keep giving my money to a corrupt institution that fucks up everything it touches. Sorry for pointing out the emperor has no clothing here is free fucking money

          • Otter@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s kind of the point here

            We all agree that the current system has issues.

            You’re saying the next move should be to disband it, and others are saying that we need an alternative first. I don’t think anyone here is saying the UN is perfect the way it is

          • kurwa@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            An imperfect system doesn’t mean we need to throw out the whole system. And if we did throw it out, you can’t just not have a replacement for it.

            People making posts on the Internet is not equivalent to real people meeting and being forced to at least give an answer.

              • kurwa@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s still an answer. We actively know they chose to abstain rather than passively. Still better than radio silence from “the Internet”

          • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            We can all agree homelessness is a problem, what matters is the solutions to the problem

            Some want to house these people, some want to build more homeless shelters, some want dedicated camping sites in the city, some want dedicated camping sites outside the city, some want to simply ban them from existing in a city, etc, etc

            If all you do is focus on the problem and not coming up with solutions then the problem will never be solved

            This is an example of why coming up with solutions is important when discussing issues

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What you need to do is define “working” in order to point out that the current solution isn’t working.

            To define “working” you either need to come up with a standard for how such organizations should operate, or barring that name some alternative solution that it can be compared to.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see. So if I see an airplane burn on the ground after falling from the sky unless I am a professional pilot, have done an indepth analysis of what happened, have a solution to prevent future problems, and have a master’s degree in aerospace engineering I am not allowed to say that there is any issue and should assume the airplane is fine.

              Sorry YOUR UN sucks

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Nuclear war is prevented by nuclear deterrence. Nothing published by the UN has the ability to stop a nation from firing its nuclear weapons at another nation’s cities.

          As for world wars, let’s wait a year and see if we’re willing to define this interconnected set of conflicts as a world war.

          • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, MAD seems to be a failed philosophy as it assumes that aggressive actions are attributable to clearly defined parties. MAD got shook the fuck up as soon as we realized dirty bombs could exist.

            I hope that our long standing mostly peace is due to the UN and media innovations… I cynically suspect that it’s due to neoliberalism and globalization making a grand war too economically costly.

            • kurwa@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I wouldn’t be surprised at money being the reason. It’s too bad some conflict can still be seen as profitable unfortunately.