Originally Posted by
reptoid
The UN has been involved in Somalia.
A conflict with North Korea would result in Seoul being decimated that's why action has been limited to sanctions.
Iran may still be attacked if they pursue nuclear weapons.
Syrian leadership has been criticized by the US. If they continue on their current path then they too could see themselves toppled with the help of NATO should the UN deem force necessary. Remember the US has pledged to abide by UN mandates which means getting an international consensus. This isn't all about the West although Western countries generally bear the burden of these decisions in terms of cost and manpower.
The UN is ineffective as far as controlling the whims of permanent members? Permanent members have undertaken military actions against foreign countries contrary to existing UN Resolutions. All excluding none are guilty; the Brits and French in Suez, the Russians in Hungary, Georgia, etc. the Chinese in Tibet and most recently the Americans in Iraq.