`We told you so' of little solace for UN diplomats

[UpInArms]

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2003/11/17/2003076204

When UN officials speak of Iraq these days, any impulse to gloat is quickly supplanted by frustration over the harsh realities of the situation in Iraq and sadness over the loss of 19 colleagues who died in a bombing in August.

<snip>

But officials and diplomats here, while welcoming the policy change, warned privately against a rapid reduction of US military forces and said they feared that the US would dump Iraq into the hands of the UN.

"We in the international community are waiting for the tablets to come down from Washington," a foreign diplomat said nervously. "Who knows what sort of face-saving formula they're going to come up with."

...more...

[young_at_heart]

1. Bush says we'll wage war again if necessary

Let's hope that statement gives them pause!

[MrSoundAndVision]

2. The UN

has lost a lot of legitimacy just due to it's allowing a security council to being with, and then allowing certain countries veto power over this council. These need to both be revoked, and the legitimacy resupplied. Then "dumping" Iraq will be considered putting the fate of Iraq into the hands of the world, as should have been pursued in the beginning. And in this new international body, the US move to invade Iraq would be realized as unrealistic to be nice, and then control of Iraq would be immediately handed to the Iraqis, who deserve to rule themselves as all people do, regardless of the weapons their governments have. I invite your comment.

[wtmusic]

3. Invitation accepted

It wasn't veto power that created the problem in Iraq, it was non-adherence to the charter we signed 58 years ago. If we had followed the UNSC's recommendation we wouldn't be in this mess right now.

It is the US and not the UN which has lost legitimacy.