A Misguided War On The United Nations

[sandensea]

In the wake of World War II, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took noble action to ensure that the unrelenting conflicts that had defined the early 20th century wouldn’t doom future generations.

His vision was clear: “to defend life, liberty, independence and religious freedom, and to preserve human rights and justice” in their own lands, the global community would need to come together and create a post-war organization that would protect the sovereignty of all nations.

It was American leadership that mobilized the international community to create the United Nations. Its successes are many: eradicating smallpox and fighting famine; responsible arms control, disarmament, and preventing nuclear proliferation; ending conflicts and preserving peace in fragile states; and ultimately, preventing another World War.

Supporting the United Nations is both a moral imperative and aligned with our own national security interests.

But you wouldn’t know that from listening to some of the reckless rhetoric from the White House and on Capitol Hill.

The Trump administration proposes a 27% cut to U.S. assessed contributions to the U.N. regular budget and U.N. specialized agencies, and a 37% cut to peacekeeping operations. The budget elminates funding for the UNICEF, as well as the U.N. Development Program, Women's and Humanitarian Affairs offices, Population Fund, High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR), and the Framework Convention on Climate Change.

When I asked Ambassador Haley what point was being made with this budget, she replied “to build up our military” - but decreasing U.S. support for U.N. peacekeeping efforts will actually end up costing us more in the long run.

The U.S. only pays $24,500 per year for each deployed peacekeeper, compared to $2.1 million per year for an American service member deployed to a war zone – about 86 times as much.

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D - VA)
At: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/a-misguided-war-on-the-united-nations_us_595cfc05e4b0da2c73265f46?vg7

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. "In the wake of World War II"? Strange way to take about someone who died during it

Most people use "in the wake of" to mean "after", not "during". And that "to defend life, liberty, independence..." phrase comes not from the founding of what we know as the United Nations (which FDR dies before, of course), but from the "Declaration by United Nations" of Jan 1st 1942 - about the allied powers fighting Germany, Italy and Japan with all resources and not making any deals:

"Being convinced that complete victory over their enemies is essential to defend life, liberty, independence and religious freedom, and to preserve human rights and justice in their own lands as well as in other lands, and that they are now engaged in a common struggle against savage and brutal forces seeking to subjugate the world"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations