With France being a non-entity, and India being the largest democracy in the world (politics help here) I’m lookng for support for India to take over France in the Permanant Security Council. France is suffering “small-man’s” disease. 2 generations of my family have shed blood to give France the freedom to slam us. I am utterly humiliated that I have French blood in me. The US, aside from the Liberals like Martin Sheen, Clinton and her wife, George Clooney, et al, is supportive of the men and women that are fighting for us.
The Flower-Power is over. We know you are in a euphoric state, trying to capture the culture/mood your pareants had 30 years ago. This is diferent, this is a person that kills anyone that doesn’t agree with how he does his business.
Hey ladies, did you know of the rape camps Uday Hussein has set up? Kuaiti women would like to talk to you. Saddam took money meant for humanitarian aid and funneled it to his sons to set up these “camps”
The Baghdad Butcher is no better than than Hitler.
To try to preserve some semblance of a GQ here, France is still a member of the security council because of the UN Charter. That’s roughly parallel to our US Constitution. We can’t just change it whenever it’s convenient to us. I imagine France could veto any changes to the charter that would affect it.
I’m forbidden to respond to anything else (not that I disagree), and I predict that (1) this post will be closed or (2) moved.
France is still in basically because breakin’ up is hard to do. Even if a country had the guts to propose such a thing, it is not a change accomplished easily. It would have to be shown not that India (or any other country) is more worthy, but that France is consistently not living up to it’s responsibilities and interfering with the goals of the UN. Before you flame even more, note the word “consistently”, OK?
Also, I think that while France itself is no longer a major player, it is seen as a kind of representative for the French-speaking world (parts of Africa, Asia, & the Carribean)
Back to your flaming: It’s simply not called for here. I know of no one who feels indifferently toward what is going on but that is not why I (or, I suspect, others) come to these boards. Keep that crap on the appropriate board or an entirely different site, thanks.
I would agree with the posters who have previously responded but I would also add that France has remained a voice of opposition to the powerful countries who seek to dominate the U.N. for their own means. Granted it upsets George Bush and individuals like yourself who see this as a good reason to attack another country, but for decades during the Cold War, France also stood up to the Soviet Union in a manner that irritated them to no end (granted we saw that action as allied with our way of thinking at the time).
I am no fan of the French (as I have posted at length in more appropriate locations), but I would be willing to bet that if I were living a small country, I would like to have a France on the Security Council to voice its opinion if some big bully of a country took it into its mind to change my leader or take my country’s natural resources. There is nothing wrong with people or coutries that do not follow the biggest guy on the block blindly.
Look, we got our way. We got to attack Iraq and drop our bombs. What are you so upset with France for?
Also, to be realpoltik about it, France has nuclear weapons. So does India of course but that makes a case for adding, rather than replacing, a security council seat.
Oh wait, I just proposed that any country who’s clandestine nuclear weapons program succeeds gets a security council seat. Let’s not go there.
France is a member of the Security Council for basically the same reasons that the 600,000 people of North Dakota have the same power in the US Senate as the 30 million or so in California.
Established institutions are difficult to change.
Also, I thought the reason to invade Iraq had nothing to do with the alleged brutality of Hussein and his sons. The world is full of evil dictators, most of whom are armed and financed by the US.
I thought that Iraq was being invaded because it thought that it could operate like Israel and ignore Securtiy council resolutions.
By the way, everyone who lives in a republic owes the French a debt of gratitude. Don’t let the propagandists turn you aginst your own pepole. Vive la France!
To keep this thread in GQ, I will assume that the question is, How does a nation get removed as a permanent member of the Security Council? The answer is that it doesn’t, not without its own consent. The UN Charter, article 23(1), establishes the five permanent members:
And the amendment process, articles 108-09, requires all five permanent members’ consent:
(Emphasis added.)
The five permanent members have “changed,” sort of, twice. The seat for “the Republic of China” was held by the Taiwanese nationalists, but is now held by the mainland Communist government. The seat for “the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics” is now held by the Russian Federation, since the Soviet Union has dissolved. Both changes were accomplished not by amending the Charter, but by recognizing a new government in the same nation that holds the permanent seat.
There was a proposal floated a few years back, around the time of German reunification, about adding Germany and Japan as permanent members. I do not recall any serious proposal about demoting one of the five existing permanent members.
France is a permanent member of the UN, because all the allies of World War II are.
Why is France still a member? This is really a good question, but I’d broaden it and ask: Why is anyone still a member of the UN? Apparently everyone these days, be it dictator or democratic leader, is ignoring the UN when there is an immediate advantage to do so.
"The US, aside from the Liberals like Martin Sheen, Clinton and her wife, George Clooney, et al, is supportive of the men and women that are fighting for us."
While it is nice that you have a strong opinion, it would be even nicer if you could discard the polemic and exchange it for more accurate views. Nobody isn’t supportive of the men and women that are fighting for the USA. After all, the common soldier is not at fault for Bush’s mistakes.
If France is a non-entity, then the UK, which is, economically, and militarily, more or less on the same foot than France is a non-entity too.
So, why didn’t you ask : Why are France and the UK still have a permanent seat on the security council? Could it be because you have a grudge against France and none against the UK?
If you want to rant, the BBQ Pit is the forum for that. If you want to debate, GD is the forum for that. The General Questions forum is for questions with factual answers. Inasmuch as this was ever really a GQ, it has been answered. This thread is closed.
