Eliminating the veto entirely creates problems with the current UNSC composition rules, since it would theoretically be possible to end up with a security council with progressive democracies outnumbered which could be ugly. See: continuing existence of Israel.
The best way to reform the veto would be to allow vetoes by 1/3 of the Security Council, which must include at least 2 of the permanent member states. Essentially, make it 2/3 majority vote requiring 3/5 of the permanent members in favour in order to pass any resolution. (The UNSC has 15 members; right now it only take 9 votes to pass a resolution, but the vote can be vetoed by any one of the permanent members.)
It would simultaneously give more power to the elected members of the Security Council and eliminate the ability of one nation to block the collective will of the entire Council, but preserve the ability of member states advancing certain interests to block resolutions detrimental to a specific portion of the world.
Of course, that would actually ensure the UNSC can do its job, and we wouldn't want
that now would we?
Oh, right, forgot about something - tangent, but still important:
Or, the U.S. proves everyone else has terrorist ties by opening up all of it's NSA surveillance and shows the world who is in bed with whom, but that would also make the U.S. a terrorist simply for the magnitude of information it's collecting on foreign entities, with intent to use that information to destroy those who oppose U.S. interests.
You need to revisit the definition of terrorism. I know it gets bandied about way too much these days and American politicians are just as guilty as anyone for using the term improperly, so you're not entirely to blame, but espionage is not terrorism. Drone strikes, sure, you can slot them into the terrorism umbrella generally, but that's more of a political position than a factual one. Espionage, no - regardless of intent.
Stalin said it best: "the purpose of terrorism is to terrorize." Terrorism is the intentional targeted violence (or threat of violence) toward
civilian populations with the intent to create fear and create a coercive effect, typically (but not necessarily) coupled with a political objective.
