"Taijitu United Nations"

[Myroria]

I think what Ben is saying is something that any military power would say, not just America. I think he makes a good point and it is something that should be discussed, if not OOC then IC when we discuss what to name this organization. None of the Security Council nations and few non-Security Council nations would have joined the UN if it seriously thought it would impede their ability to wage war, and that's something we should keep in mind when we discuss this organization.

[Solclquial]

IMO, an IPO rife with bureaucratic inertia, ulterior agendas and suspiciously powerful heads of the Council that still gets the job done remarkably often gives you the best of both worlds. Who cares about a few corrupt members if you have a tenacious Commandant-General or something swatting away their plans -- likewise, the stubborn Finances General would choose to keep the status quo of slow ratifications of resolutions and missing resources to stall international conflicts and tensions.

[Khem]

An idealistic, well-working international organization seems boring to me. It's basically just another layer of government added on top. While the composite nations of Taijitu surely agree on some matters, it would be only natural if they form factions and compete with each other on different occasions.

Each nation has different strengths, be they economically, militarily, diplomatically or by virtue of not having to lose or gain a lot, so they can sell their votes for the greater good - or the greater gain. Now that I think of it, wouldn't it be most interesting if this supranational organization was mostly employed to forge alliances and broker deals, while "normal" politics go on as usual around it?

This makes me contemplate that the organization might do well being in a stickied topic or subforum.

IMO, an IPO rife with bureaucratic inertia, ulterior agendas and suspiciously powerful heads of the Council that still gets the job done remarkably often gives you the best of both worlds. Who cares about a few corrupt members if you have a tenacious Commandant-General or something swatting away their plans -- likewise, the stubborn Finances General would choose to keep the status quo of slow ratifications of resolutions and missing resources to stall international conflicts and tensions.

I'm definitely in favor of the potential for this dramatically speaking. We could even write up specific events of corruption while assuming that in general the organization was doing its job, very clever.