The US is introducing a bill to get out the United Nations.

[urleft]

As my feeble memory recalls, US Policy under Reagan changed to the option for the UN to move elsewhere. 

Now there is a congressional bill to get the US out of the UN: 
Bill to Get U.S. Out of UN Introduced in New Congress

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/25078-bill-to-get-u-s-out-of-un-introduced-in-new-congress


So I am interested in what you expats think of the UN. 

[davureborn]

  Understandable. The UK tried to intervene a total of, I believe, 79 times to change regulations in the EU that had been imposed from above by bureaucrats and succeeded a grand total of zero times. Arguments for staying with the EU included the idea that the UK should stay in order to change the things they didn't like are ridiculous.
  I don't think the UN can be changed either. Apparently human rights in the Arab world are now ok as long as they conform with Sharia. UNESCO and UNRWA have been taken over by Islamists and/or Marxists and so on.
  Anyway, it isn't going to happen.

[isanbirder]

Wrong way round.  The UN should get out of the US;  otherwise it is dominated by the superpower.  Much is wrong with the UN, but disbanding it is no answer.

[Ahab]

You could continue to strive for world good even if you got out of the corrupt and inept UN. Additionally the UN couldn't stop genocide in a third world African nation what makes anyone think it could stop anyone that wanted to start a nuclear or any other type of war?

[isanbirder]

Quite true, Ahab.  The UN couldn't do anything, like the league of Nations before it.  But a forum where every country can participate is still potentially better than no forum at all.

[Ahab]

Perhaps that is the only reason to remain a part of the UN. Some may consider that a weak argument to remain attached to this corrupt and inept (in my opinion) organization.

[vpi78]

The UN is inept but it serves a purpose in funneling aid when politics get involved. I saw it often in Iraq where the French could not participate much in US efforts to rebuild Iraq because it would be seen as supporting the US war effort, so they and their companies worked through the UN.

As far as the UN being based in NYC, most Americans would love to see them leave.

[urleft]

The Trump effect.

[urleft]

Trump Prepares Orders Aiming at Global Funding and Treaties

The Interpreter

By MAX FISHER JAN. 25, 2017

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/us/politics/united-nations-trump-administration.html

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing executive orders that would clear the way to drastically reduce the United States’ role in the United Nations and other international organizations, as well as begin a process to review and potentially abrogate certain forms of multilateral treaties.

The first of the two draft orders, titled “Auditing and Reducing U.S. Funding of International Organizations” and obtained by The New York Times, calls for terminating funding for any United Nations agency or other international body that meets any one of several criteria.

Those criteria include organizations that give full membership to the Palestinian Authority or Palestine Liberation Organization, or support programs that fund abortion or any activity that circumvents sanctions against Iran or North Korea. The draft order also calls for terminating funding for any organization that “is controlled or substantially influenced by any state that sponsors terrorism” or is blamed for the persecution of marginalized groups or any other systematic violation of human rights.

The order calls for then enacting “at least a 40 percent overall decrease” in remaining United States funding toward international organizations.