It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


U.N. Sanctions vs. U.N Military Action...mirrors the Child Development Debate

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 08:24 PM
I am posting this to show the comparison to the Child Development debate of Positive Reinforcement vs. Corporal Punishment and it's relation to U.N. Sanctions vs. U.N. Military Action.

First let me give an explanation of each:

Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter

Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter sets out the UN Security Council's powers to maintain peace. It allows the Council to "determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression" and to take military and nonmilitary action to "restore international peace and security".

Chapter VII also gives the Military Staff Committee responsibility for strategic coordination of forces placed at the disposal of the UN Security Council. It is made up of the chiefs of staff of the five permanent members of the Council.

The UN Charter's prohibition of member states of the UN attacking other UN member states is central to the purpose for which the UN was founded in the wake of the destruction of World War II: to prevent war. This overriding concern is also reflected in the Nuremberg Trials' concept of a crime against peace "starting or waging a war against the territorial integrity, political independence or sovereignty of a state, or in violation of international treaties or agreements..." (crime against peace), which was held to be the crime that makes all war crimes possible.

UN Security Council Sanctions Committees

Under Chapter VII of the Charter, the Security Council can take enforcement measures to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such measures range from economic and/or other sanctions not involving the use of armed force to international military action.

The use of mandatory sanctions is intended to apply pressure on a State or entity to comply with the objectives set by the Security Council without resorting to the use of force. Sanctions thus offer the Security Council an important instrument to enforce its decisions. The universal character of the United Nations makes it an especially appropriate body to establish and monitor such measures.

The Council has resorted to mandatory sanctions as an enforcement tool when peace has been threatened and diplomatic efforts have failed. The range of sanctions has included comprehensive economic and trade sanctions and/or more targeted measures such as arms embargoes, travel bans, financial or diplomatic restrictions.

At the same time, a great number of States and humanitarian organizations have expressed concerns at the possible adverse impact of sanctions on the most vulnerable segments of the population. Concerns have also been expressed at the negative impact sanctions can have on the economy of third countries.

Now the comparable Child Development techniques.

Guidelines For Using Time Out With Children and Preteens

Time Out Time-out means time out from positive reinforcement (rewarding experiences). It is a procedure used to decrease undesirable behaviors. The main principle of this procedure is to ensure that the individual in time-out is not able to receive any reinforcement for a particular period of time.
How to Use Time Out Effectively

Time Out Area The time-out area should be easily accessible, and in such a location that the child can be easily monitored while in time-out. For example, if most activity takes place on the first floor of the house, the time-out area should not be on an upper floor. A chair in the corner of the dining room is an excellent spot. Placing a kitchen timer on the table is a good way to keep the child informed of how much time he has left to serve.

Arguments That Have Been Given in Support
of Physical Punishment of Children

* It stops the misbehavior (especially critical in dangerous situations).

* It shows the children who's boss.

* Is "part of the parent's cultural and/or religious heritage".

* Is a necessary "last resort" when children are "willfully defiant" (Dobson; Trumbull; Larzelere)

* Baumrind: "Spanking is not a generative cause of aggression or pathology in children when used appropriately". . . .

* is controlled
* is contingent on the child's behavior
* the child is forewarned
* parent uses more positive than negative incentives
* is immediate
* parent is calm
* is used privately
* is carried out in conjunction with reasoning
* the intention is to correct, not to retaliate
* is mild; does not escalate to abuse
* children are not under 18 months or past puberty

So let's discuss this, in comparison, the two relate for the most part. Which do you think has the strongest message in relation to the Global Community. Should Countries be put in time out or spanked? This thread is in response to the latest chest puffing that a few Countries have been doing lately i.e. NK, Iran, and as of late Israel with their Gaza blockade. Please discuss.

posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:10 PM
I hope this isn't another flop thread

Does anyone else see any similarity between the two?

posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:14 PM
Spare the rod and spoil the child. I am all for spanking, but only as a last resort and you never spank when angry. I also don't agree fully with yelling due to the fact that it loses it's effectiveness when used frequently. Speak softly, let the child understand what they did was wrong and why what they did was wrong. I have 2 boys, my oldest is 12 and I don't ever think I had to spank him once. My 4 year old is a different story, He really tests my patience but I always make sure that I A) don't yell, and B) don't spank out of anger or when angry. I always resort to just explaining to him (my youngest) numerous times because eventually he will get it. I also think that spanking out of anger and/or when angry causes a child to harbor those types of behaviorism's which will ultimately be projected as said child is older, meaning the child will act out violently.

posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 09:17 PM
reply to post by kimish

I also think that spanking out of anger and/or when angry causes a child to harbor those types of behaviorism's which will ultimately be projected as said child is older, meaning the child will act out violently.

Interesting point when compared to the relation of the Global Perspective.

new topics

top topics

log in