re: What if there were no UN t?
No UN means no weapons inspector, no UNICEF etc...
And the US going at war alone....and risking only its own soldiers and
running the risk, alone, to loose the war.
What the UN can or cannot do depends on its members and also what they decided when it was created.
It is very easy for the US to currently blame the UN for anything it wishes to.
But instead, it should understand why it can't be as efficient as it could be. It is the fault, in large part, of the US itself, if the UN isn't producing results.
But if the the current US administration is blaming the UN, I consider this a good sign because this means the US is interested and might positively contribute to its modernization.