@KenBoessenkool So, what benefit would there be in abolishing it?

@wordsmythical Reason #5 ,789: It would strip the veneer of credibility from nations who deserve none of it.

@KenBoessenkool replace with ?

@rupatho Nothing. Just kill it.

@KenBoessenkool That's a column!

@jengerson A really short one is all that’s needed. Like 7 or 8 words!

@KenBoessenkool So you stand with dictators and appeasement?

@KenBoessenkool Great attention seeking Tweet, well done.

@5L4P57R4 Nothing. Just get rid of it.

@KenBoessenkool Keep a few of it’s bodies like UNHCR or UNESCO … but otherwise, end it. Pour some life into regional bodies like the OAS.

@KenBoessenkool

@sebastienjaveri Not NATO, and EU is none of our business.

@KenBoessenkool This is a ridiculous take, for many reasons, not the least of which is that Western Nations have benefited tremendously from being rule makers in the international systems of which the UN is part. The alternative would be worse.

@KenBoessenkool Sure - long as Canada commits to becoming a nuclear power, and world leader in drone, AI, and cyber warfare capability. Better not strip the veneer if we're not prepared for what comes next.

@KenBoessenkool That a vile thought about the most united and splintered civil law organization humanity has Ken. This is little different than Kennedy’s Cuban missile crisis moment except in bizarro / reverse. Putin’s saying get out of my backyard if you want security and peace as agreed.

@KenBoessenkool Insightful comment with clear options presented.

@KenBoessenkool And you say this….why?

@KenBoessenkool Not sure why we would just throw the whole thing away, rather than fixing the things within that no longer work. Like the Security Council. We still need an international forum for discussing global issues.