Posted on 03/03/2003 10:54:41 AM PST by Bob J
Edited on 03/03/2003 11:05:48 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
We shouldn't even be in Iraq. Right now, Iraq could be a fully functioning democracy with constitutional liberties and human rights guaranteed to it's citizens. Right now, Iraq could be a leader in identifying and eliminating terrorism in the militant Muslim world. But it's not, because of the UN.
When the US military was knocking at Baghdads door and could have easily eliminated Hussein and ended his bloody regime, it did not move forward because that authority had not been granted by the UN. To do so would have been a violation of UN protocol. Oh my.
If the US had done what it knew was right instead of falling over itself to avoid insulting the world's most expensive and least effective deliberative body, not only would the current engagement be unnecessary, but it is possible with the resources gained through an Iraqi alliance that the rise in power of militant Islamism might have been curtailed and the kind of horror experienced on 911 might have been avoided.
The era of negotiating and compromising with worldwide despots, murderers and terrorists who are committed to the destruction of western civilization, is over. No matter what the burden in their removal or elimination, one by one if necessary, one thing is certain. If we wait or do nothing, the cost of that inaction will be much greater in the future. Do we desire to leave to our children a world that is held hostage by threats of biological, chemical and nuclear annihilation from the insane ?
The UN is a political body that gives aid and comfort to the most decicated enemies of freedom and democracy. It is made up of three kinds of people. A very small number of friends, a larger number of enemies who daily plan our destruction and the murder of our citizens, and an even larger number who are so jeaolous of our prosperity they wish more people had died in the twin towers.
Like communism, the UN is a idea which begins with high ideals and lofty promises, but never delivers. Through it's incessant hand wringing and low brow back room political intrigue, the UN has stood by while millions have been slaughtered in Rwanda, Bosnia and Kosovo. Through it's dithering and inaction, it is partly to blame for these atrocities as it is for the rise of militant Islamism and despots like Saddam Hussein.
It is foolish for the US to believe it must wait for the UN to wave it's tainted sceptor prior to protecting and safeguarding it's citizens. The US should ignore the UN, invade Iraq and remove Saddam Hussein, and then immediately start planning the next operation. Freedom loving people will never be safe as long as the Saddam Husseins and Osama bin Ladens of the world have access to weapons of mass destruction.
Blair has been getting bloodied for supporting us. It's sound policy to give him what cover we can at the UN. And from what I hear, the UK/US may pull another rabbit out of a hat and get majority support for their resolution.
Nice piece of revisionism. We did'nt even try to get a stronger resolution out of the Security Council, because any suggestion of regime change would have cost us the use of Saudi bases, and UAE, Omani, Saudi, Egyptian, and Syrian troops. Bush I did a remarkable job putting that coalition together and keeping Israel on the sidelines when the Scuds started flying. Getting rid of Saddam in 1991 was not on the table. It could'nt be.
Having said that, we did really screw up by allowing the Iraqi Military to fly their helos and operate heavy weapons in the Shi'a South and Kurdish North. We could have ordered their military to their pre-war barracks, and grounded EVERYTHING that flew. Have a covert operation to arm the rebels in the north and south, and voila, c' ya Saddam.
Can't blame this one on the UN; Bush I knew he would have never got the rest of the Gulf and the SC to go along with a total war, and that was'nt what he asked Congress, the UN, or our staging points in the Gulf to go along with.
It seems to be grating on everyone's nerves, at least it is on mine. I can't even watch the debates anymore, because it's like "Groundhog Day." But when the major unit callups came out around Christmas you could pretty well pick March as the sweet spot.
I agree the UN vote will be a cliffhanger. I suspect if we can pull out nine votes, Russia may jump on our side and France and China would not veto. France is fighting hard which shows me they're worried they may lose this and find themselves isolated.
The UN is a relic of the Cold War, and it operates from a Cold War-era paradymn -- it exists to maintain the status quo, which means a stand-off between the free world and oppressive regimes around the world. President Bush has established a bold foreign policy for the 21st Century -- to squash international terrorism, and the states which support it, leaving liberty for oppressed peoples in our wake. The UN still operates in 20th Century "diplomacy," and stand in our way of liberating the world from terror. This is why the UN is irrelevant. It has failed to change with the changing nature of the world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.