this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
9 points (90.9% liked)

Overseas News

695 readers
12 users here now

A place for Australians and friends to share news from the other countries. Like all communities here, we discuss topics from the Australian perspective.

If you're looking for a global /c/worldnews instead, search for the many options on federated instances.

Rules
  1. Follow the aussie.zone rules
  2. We are not a generic World News clone. News must be relevant to Australians and our region. Obvious disregard will earn an warning and then a ban if continued. (If an article isn't from an Oceanian news outlet, and it doesn’t mention Australia, then it’s probably off-topic)
  3. Leave seppocentrism at the door. If you don't know what that means, you're not ready to post here yet.
  4. Avoid editorialising headlines. Opinions go in the comments, not the post.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When the biggest historical funder of the UN rips funding and then pulls a stunt like this do we think it'll still be around in 10 years or will something else come up?

United Nations faces ‘imminent financial collapse’ without urgent action, UN chief says

https://apnews.com/article/united-nations-financial-crisis-trump-dues-77a204381b059685a490f80f73a0ec97

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DiaDeLosMuertos@aussie.zone 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Jesus what a damn mess. I mean having a prostitute front the meeting is one thing, but pulling funding for such an organisation is one massive nightmare in the making.

I mean the US spends over two billion per day on their military budget so the UN bill shouldn't be a problem. I think we know "who" the problem is.

When does the lunacy cease I wonder.

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

When does the lunacy cease I wonder.

If history is an indicator, it won't cease on its own. It takes power in the hands of masses to truly pressure a government to act smart, or to replace it with a better system.

[–] eureka@aussie.zone 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The United Nations organisation shouldn't be understood as a neutral entity, and the fact that one of its core founders, benefactors and yes, historical funders is so brazenly rejecting it is just another signal that the US have less and less interest in the facade of diplomacy.

It's hard to say to what degree it might be replaced or salvaged (e.g. if the US elect a Democrat government), as it's inherently used to hostile nations. I don't believe it will be replaced through a split - the whole concept is that it's a global organisation, not a bloc.

[–] PetulantBandicoot@aussie.zone 1 points 3 days ago

Board of piss to take over the UNs' role.

[–] Seagoon_@aussie.zone 0 points 3 days ago

It's one the last institutions that still has the public trust, same with WHO

the grifters and bad countries are setting up panels to get their criminality rubber stamped

there is no accountability, little real power, no fact checking

but hey, if a UN panel guy says it it must be true!!