Question: What claim can be made from the following pieces of evidence?
1. Indeed , where UN peacekeepers have been sent into war-torn countries , they have sometimes been guilty of the most horrendous human rights abuses themselves .
2. As of 2011 , the UNs Human Rights Council itself is comprised of members such as Saudi Arabia , Cuba and China .
3. Despite the development of the concept of human rights in the post-war world , the UN has totally failed to protect the rights of citizens , ethnic minorities , women and children .
4. It has stood by during episodes of genocide in Cambodia , Rwanda , Congo and Yugoslavia among many others , tolerates some of the worlds worst dictatorships as members , and does nothing to improve the situation of women in developing nations .

Claim: UN ignores or enables human rights abuses.


Question: What claim can be made from the following pieces of evidence?
1. Thus it is certainly not wrong -- and may even be our humanitarian obligation -- to bring democracy to those who do not have it , just as we would intervene in other situations in which serious rights were being abused .
2. Democracy is the only form of government which upholds the value of political self-determination : that each individual has a right to form his/her government , and to vote out governments s/he does not like .
3. Democratic regimes are the best form of government , and it is our obligation to try and provide that to others .
4. Political autonomy also has instrumental value insofar as it allows individuals to check abusive governments which may seek to violate other human rights .
5. To deny this right is to deny the inherent worth and freedom of the individual .

Claim: Because democracy is the best form of government, it is not wrong-- and indeed may even be our obligation-- to bring it to those who do not have it.


Question: What claim can be made from the following pieces of evidence?
1. Much public opinion holds that something must be done to tackle this .
2. The sight of armed police officers patrolling the streets will not only deter gangs from harassing residents , but will instil in communities a confidence that they are being properly protected .
3. Armed police reassure law-abiding citizens at a time when gun-related crime is increasing in most European countries and parts of North America .
4. In the UK 28 gun crimes are committed every day .
5. Thus , for example , police officers at British airports routinely carry sub-machine guns , although there is no evidential pattern to suggest that this high-visibility weaponry offers any situational strategic advantage over a more subtle arming .
6. Gangs are not interested in fighting the police ; they are more concerned about attacks from other gangs in their area who are willing to break the law and attack them unprovoked .
7. People feel safer when they see armed police , especially if they perceive them as a response to a heightened risk .

Claim: Arming the police makes communities feel safer


Question: What claim can be made from the following pieces of evidence?
1. NATO initiated military action against Yugoslavia , under the imprimatur of the United States and the United Kingdom , without receiving Security Council authorisation .
2. In an attempt to circumvent this , countries and military alliances are forced to act unilaterally .
3. The statistics of the numbers of vetoes passed at any particular point in UN history does not reveal the true defect of the institutional arrangement .
4. Purported U.N. actions that would clearly antagonise a member of the P5 never even reach the Security Council ; such is the awareness that the veto would stall its progress .
5. Nevertheless , there is little that can be done such is the absolute power of the veto that Russia and the other P5 members have .
6. Furthermore , the silence of the Security Council whilst Russia launched a relentless and brutal campaign against Chechnya was deafening .
7. It had become evident that any UN military involvement would be vetoed by both China and Russia .

Claim:
The veto power is a barrier to discourse, preventing the U.N. from acting where the majority of its member states want it to.