The security council was always kind of a dubious proposition. The UN isn't a government, and it lacks the "monopoly on the legitimate use of force". At best it could send peacekeepers in to much, much smaller countries, but even then results were mixed at best.<p>The UN is far more effective at humanitarian efforts, and at providing a central place for conducting negotiations. Its security council receives a lot of attention because it sounds the most like the part that wants the UN to be a world government to enforce an end to war. It has never been that, and distracts from the things that the UN actually does very well -- a lot of jaw-jaw that has prevented a lot of war-war.