The U.N. is the single greatest source of suffering since the days of Hitler.  How many times do we have to be convinced that this organization is a negative on civilization?

When this world forum gives the likes of Ahmadinejad and Chavez and George Clooney equal consideration with George Bush, one has to question, yet again, how rational and sound an organization it is.

Is the United Nations meant to be simply a propaganda instrument?  How can the U.N. allow Ahmadinejad, who clearly expressed his desire to eliminate Israel from the map, not only to remain a part of it, but have the honor to speak to it?  No fair organization would ever do that, a propaganda tool would.

I have believed for a long time, as I imagine most Americans, that the U.N. is irrelevant.  But it's more than that.  It's a force for "bad".

The same lack of accountability that makes anonymous internet posts such a cesspool, keeps any nations from banding together to solve the problems of the world.  The genocide occurring in Darfur... were it not for the U.N., enough world ire might have been raised, coalitions formed, and real solutions attained.  But in a world of nations that can dismiss responsibility by dumping the job on the "group", nothing gets done.  How long does the list have to be?  Rwanda, Oil-for-Food, Saddam's unpunished defiance, Iran's defiance, North Korea's, Darfur, Israel's vilification, Lebanon, the Al Qaeda war in Iraq...

My biggest grievance about the U.S. in world affairs is our desire to lead without courage.  Leadership of lasting import requires substantial courage, often to a point of offending.  The historically greatest Presidents in the U.S., Lincoln, Washington, Reagan, etc. had atrocious poll numbers (or popularity), but they had the courage to fight through the adversity, and eventually history vindicated them.

The U.S. however seems to be content with taking these great problems, throwing up our hands, and like the rest of the world mailing it over to the U.N.  The most damnable part: we keep going back.

Look, I could have written this in 2002.  Nothing has changed, not even our ability to break free from the U.N.  How much is enough, Gordon?

The solution to me seems clear: 

1) Kick the U.N. out of New York.  There's a perfect occasion to break up:  a new U.N.  building.  See if Paris will build it, or Tehran.

2) Lower our contribution to the bare minimum.  I'm not certain any figures about how much the U.S. contributes to the U.N., but we should move it to the lowest amount.  I tend to doubt it currently is there.

3)  Stay in the U.N., stay on the Security Council, but veto everything.  This will make the U.N. truly irrelevant because not a thing will pass.

The U.N. was a dumb idea, just like the League of Nations.  It's hard to think of very much they have done that has benefited the world, whereas the opportunity cost they have fostered, this groupthink in lieu of action, has cost many a life and many a happiness.

But what will other nations think???  Sorry to tell ya, but they'll still hate us.