[imported_Fluffy_Bunny]

Originally Posted by Drew

The contributions of a country as a percentage of their GDP is pretty irrelevant in terms of the question that is being posed.

What you are saying is that the United Nations could survive as a relevant world entity after losing approximately a fourth of its budget, a third of its peacekeeping budget, its $450 million HQ building (which would cost $1.2 billion to replace) and the membership of the most influential (whether anyone likes it or not) nation in the world.

Please help me understand that logic.

Go look up the League of Nations, it was a disaster but its proof such an organisation did exist without the USA. Pakistan & Canada also technically contribute more to U.N. operations than USA, it's more a matter of peace keeping & law enforcement than money, naturally money is needed for these operations but a combined force can contain third world countries, all you need is a relatively well trained army like that of Nigeria, Canada or Pakistan to do this.

~