The next version of an international council needs actual authoritative power. There’s no point if someone just decides they don’t want to listen and will do whatever they want. Veto power should be curtailed if a supermajority of countries are in agreement otherwise a bad actor will push their weight around.
Honestly, I wouldn’t want that either. All I’d be asking for is countries to be held to account for their actions. ALL countries. And a unified approach to dealing with counties if the super majority thinks that’s the best option. No country should get too powerful to just say “nah, I don’t wanna” and do what they want without recourse. Likewise no country should have a veto where 99% of the other countries say they want something done about it but one country, who has veto power, says they can act with impunity and that’s all that happens.
That is not how it should work but is how it currently works. The UN is meant to be a forum to prevent wars - but that fails when there are no consequences for those who start, propagate and support wars and genocide.
Countries should sign into the union knowing that if they are tyrannical and the super majority don’t like it, there will be consequences, even if purely economic. It should be written into the laws of all the countries who sign into the union. I don’t think a UN Police should be required - all countries should work together to create a multi-jurisdictional force anyway.
And poof no countries ever sign into it. That’s the issue.
That’s how the EU works (a union of countries).
It’s how UK works (union of countries).
It’s how the US, India, Australia, Germany work (union of states).
It’s how Canada works (union of provinces).
Literally it’s how all unions work. Essentially it should be like making the world one country beholden to each other for the good and harmony of all. It’s not such a bold idea as, and I’m sure I mentioned previously, it’s how ALL unions work.
Yeah no, and your examples got progressively more ridiculous. Just no. Sorry that’s one of the dumbest takes I’ve ever seen. There’s not any point in saying anything past that.
Spoken like someone who wants to take advantage of others. Thank you for showing your cards.
The whole point of a union is rules for all, not just for some. Equality, or even equity, not “some more equal than others”.
Your attack doesn’t even make any sense. Ok I really have to leave it at that.