 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Aug 2008 : 17:35:11
|
Originally posted by turk
Under my proposed system, UN will work as following.
No more veto, security council etc..Nations will have votes based on their population. There will be three body
1. Legislative
2. Executive
3. Judicial
Executive will be based on groups/or individual countries. For example
Big countries like China, India, USA, Brazil, Nigeria, Germany will be represented permanently. Also, many countries can form a group to be represented in the executive branch. For example: Gambia, senegal,chad,sudan, mali can form a group called SAHARA if their population is above 50 million they are eligible to be represented in UN Executive branch. Every 6 months, one of these countries will hold the chair to represent the group. Sahara is geographic group. THe groups can be ethnic or ideologic too. Cuba, Venezualla, Bolivia, Guinnee can establish socialist bloc.
Executive will replace security council. The decision will be pass here if more than 50 percent pass. Than decision will go to Legislative branch.
Legislative Branch: Will be representative from countries based on 3 levels. 2 is regional level, the other general.
Before everthing, countries in conflict must have mediation. Mediation must be between countries having conflict. Each country would select two countries for the mediation. One from the region, one from somewhere else.
For example for our Georgia/Russia example. Georgia may pick Turkey and USA for mediation. Russia would pick Armenia and China. If there is no resolution, the neighbour conferance and mediators can try resolution. Than goes to regional than General. each state if resolution is not happy, it will go one up. This may force countries to comprimise.
The law executive body sent come to first, the countries that has border to the conflict, than regional body.
If the law get more than 50 % vote, it will go to general body. This time in order to pass the legislation, 66 % of vote required.
What do you think?
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
Edited by - turk on 12 Aug 2008 18:58:25 |
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 12 Aug 2008 : 18:44:34
|
The voting numbers would be different. For example
For condemnation 50 % would be enough. For economic sanctions 55 %. For military measure 75 %. Or something like that.
May I add, power to the people?
|
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
 |
|
|
dbaldeh
USA
934 Posts |
Posted - 18 Aug 2008 : 18:23:46
|
Interesting proposal Turk, when time permits I will review it more and give an opinion of what I think. I think the UN need every strength and support as a world body. Countries like the US and Britain should not be allowed to deminize the role of the UN and praise it when it fits them.
There should be a level playing field and fair representation no matter how much money a nation contributes. To my understanding US monopolises a lot of things in the UN because they contribute the most money and military aid. No single nation's nomination should be allowed in the UN.
The topic is worth discussing...
Later |
Baldeh,
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi
Visit http://www.gainako.com for your daily news and politics |
|
|
|
njucks
Gambia
1131 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2008 : 10:28:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by dbaldeh
..........There should be a level playing field .....
this is the only way you can have world peace. when the Zimbabwe issue came up its easy to take it to the security council by some nations. Fine. Now with both US and Russia invading other countries, just imagine, not only is it a waste of time for the council to meet or have a resolution, its stupid to even attempt to draft one considering that both the US/Russia have vetos.
so whilst some can argue that Iran etc might be a future threat in some people's imagination, its pretty obvious that both Russia and the US are the real threat to world peace in front of our very own eyes. the evidence is quite clear.
Turk, McCain is proposing something similar like a ''league of Democracies''.I hope he loses. one important thing for your Proposal is that ALL COUNTRIES should sign ALL TREATIESto remain members. no one should have options like the current system where the US does not recognise the Internationl Court.
what you are seeing here is utter incompetence. WWII is no longer relevant for people to justify their stupid vetos. the world is allowing itself to be led by incompetence Western leadership.the sooner we end it the better.
|
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 19 Aug 2008 : 16:25:25
|
Where does Religion & Inter-faiths body fits under new proposals? We also have wise men, noble leaders and touch bearers that need a forum to participate in policy or conflict resolutions for Global peace and stability
Please consider breaking barriers through a Supreme Religious and Inter-Faiths Organ for dialogue and resolving many conflicts and wars brought about by religion?
Lets be mindful of two forums or UN tier organs (Kingdom of God and a Free World for Mankind). Who should rule in harmonising us? Religion and politics conflicts with each! |
Edited by - kobo on 19 Aug 2008 16:38:05 |
|
|
|
turk
USA
3356 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2008 : 19:42:40
|
my intention was to democratise the UN system.
It is because some are rich and big they have more power. It is very unfair India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Brasil does not have any power. The idea UN has political party system. It is OK for example USA to loby for vote. It is OK countries form coalitions for example African bloc, latino bloc etc.... Current system favour imperialists. Let take over the control of this planet.
kobo
There is a alliance of the civilization inititative by UN, lead by Spanish and Turkish Primeminister to improve dialog between West and Islam. |
diaspora! Too many Chiefs and Very Few Indians.
Halifa Salah: PDOIS is however realistic. It is fully aware that the Gambian voters are yet to reach a level of political consciousness that they rely on to vote on the basis of Principles, policies and programmes and practices. |
|
|
|
kobo
United Kingdom
7765 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2008 : 17:25:05
|
Religion and Inter-faith dialogue is not about between West and Islam? Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hindhuism, Shirk, Humanist amongst others are part of faiths of the West? Religion and Inter-faith dialogue can control conflicts and we need proper constitutions and protocols to guarantee freedom of belief, rights to cutural dress codes, no persecution or harassment; to understand & respect rights of others etc.
I envisage that there should be universality under UN Supreme Religion/Inter-Faith Council, to allow representations of various supreme councils (i.e World Christian Council, World Islamic Council, World Hindhu Council, World Judaism/Jewish Council, World Aethist Council, etc) ; to participate in WORLD AFFAIRS or healing the world on HUNGER, WARS, PEACE & SECURITY!
I just feel that we have wise men and interlectuals who are not politicians out there that need a UN mandate and forum for World Affairs. However don't know how to develope my ideas so that it can fit under United Nations forum
|
Edited by - kobo on 21 Aug 2008 17:26:37 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
