NEWS: Powell Accuses Sudan of Genocide

Say Sudan's crisis right now was a famine instead of outright genocide, but that slightly less vicious treatment of black Africans in Darfur had led to their not being in the UN.

Given today's "amazing outpour of concern" toward a million displaced refugees and tens of thousands of murdered innocents, how quick do you think the same helpful nations would move to offer aid of any sort (monetary, food, etc) toward a state that doesn't even participate in their forum?

What point are you trying to prove? Sudan being in the UN obviously isn't helping them at the moment. I really doubt it would matter much either way. Actually they might get more help, because you wouldn't have Sudan pushing the human rights commission to ignore flagrant human rights violations.

The human rights commission that also consists of several other flagrant violators of human rights, who have to play politics and skew any and all human rights violations as much as possible so they don't end up condemning something in one nation that they are openly supporting in their own. And strangely enough, many of the largest human rights violators don't hold free elections!

Dump all these nations, and you know what? The human rights commission might be able to actually do something.

No one here is arguing that the UN is even close to being 100% effective in situations like this. But I think you're arguing the wrong argument here: I'm talking about how being cut off from the UN would make things worse for the oppressed populace, but you are citing (very valid) examples on how the system doesn't work at the nation-member level.

My point is that removing nations from the UN will only serve to alienate them more, give their rulers de facto permission to do as they wish, and--worst of all--allow them to claim that, as they are not part of the UN, anything from human rights declarations to the Geneva Convention cannot be held over them. In effect, you're taking away the few benefits an imperfect system can provide to the oppressed people abused by very the nation-member leadership that's bending said system's rules.

Or, put more simply, UNICEF wouldn't have been focused as much on Ethiopia if its government decided in a fit of nuttiness that it was better off alone in the midst of a famine. Other nations simply would not have dumped millions or billions of dollars, ruples, whatever, to aid a nation that didn't officially interact with or promise back anything to them. Regardless how hard Ethiopians cried and pleaded.

When did he figure this out, when they fired rockets from hellicopters into neighboring villages? You know what really doesn't help out, Embargos. It keeps the citizens famined, while warlords and the government reamain unefected.