[devonin]

You're thinking of the UN Security Council. The nations in it change periodically, but there are five permanent members (which I think are the same ones with veto powers?). I know USA and Russia are two, but I can't think of the other three. China possibly, then France and Great Britain?

The membership of the UN is fixed. Any nation that is recognized as a legitimate country and can afford to pay the dues is allowed membership. The Security Council is the US, UK, France, Russia and China, and the thing they can do that other countries can't is flat out veto any legislation put before the UN as a whole. Also, people seem to misunderstand the purpose of the UN fairly often. They were never intended to be world peacekeepers, they were never intended to try and fix the social and political problems in individual countries.

Pretty much the entire purpose of the UN in forming after WW2 was to be an active force in preventing WW3. They made the military conquest of countries illegal, and are supposed to ensure that it doesn't happen. Internal strife, civil war, civilian protests none of that is supposed to be the UN's concern (Which is why things like Rwanda happened, and why nothing is being done in Colombia right now)

So my question is how can we control the world population?

The best answer is still the one you ruled out in your opening statement. Though uh, yeah, Hitler wasn't intending to "control the world population" nor did he do what he did by "killing the weak, the old, and the handicapped" You've completely misrepresented Hitler's purpose, targets and methods, and he is an example that has nothing whatsoever to do with your question at hand.

We should try to promote things that kill people. Such as war, extreme sports, and the death penalty.

This is an absurd and grossly poor line of reasoning. That's probably the -worst- way to "control the world population" that I've seen, and that includes in comparison to things like "randomly killing people via lottery"

This thread is on very thin ice, as being a topic that doesn't really have much of a purpose for discussion. You can't reconcile freedom and human rights with strict orders controlling what these people can do vis-a-vis their own bodys.

A much better question would be "what sorts of things can we do to make it so our population problem isn't actually a problem"