Board Thread:Random RP/@comment-26347028-20160220090259/@comment-26295802-20160221205149

Patrick.vtap wrote: "I must concur with the Queen. The United Nations was never meant as an enforcer or a military power. Anyways, why do you care about the secular organization of the United Nations." "You will recall that in the previous century the UN seemed to be in decline. US president Ronald Reagan escalated the East-West controversies and the UN seemed to be a thing of the past with its emphasis on North-South conflicts. This orginization was in trouble financially with few members willing to pay their share. With the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, however, your next president, Mr. Bush, recognized what he called the 'New World Order,' which resonated deep within my young heart. The original basis for the UN charter promised cooperation among the first fifty-one members, including great powers."

He goes on to discuss the various peacekeeping military actions the UN has taken since the Korean conflict of the 1950s.

"As you know, the UN has its legacy in the League of Nations, which I believe was the first international peacekeeping body. It came about at the end of the First World War, but when it failed to prevent a second, it became anachronistic. Out of that failure came the United Nations which must remain strong to prevent World War II which would result in the end of life as we know it."