The UN: Already Part of the Problem
In today's Chicago Tribune, Alan Dershowitz writes:
This is a real test for the UN. If it cannot--or will not--distinguish between terrorists who target civilians and a democracy that seeks to stop the terrorism while minimizing civilian casualties, it has become part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.
He's writing in terms of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, but the fact is that the UN has already become part of the problem in the larger fight against Islamofascism.
It was the UN dithering that allowed Saddam Hussein to delude himself that he could go on keeping (or pretending to keep) stocks of WMD while shooting at American planes without expecting any retribution. It is the UN that refuses to stand behind its own words of condemnation when it comes to the North Koreans and Iranians developing nuclear weapons. Wars spring from such misunderstandings.
Ultimately, if as Dershowitz points out, Kofi Annan can't grasp the moral distinction between Israel and Hezbollah, why should we assume that he can understand the difference between a country like the United States and a country like Iran possessing nuclear weapons?
This is a real test for the UN. If it cannot--or will not--distinguish between terrorists who target civilians and a democracy that seeks to stop the terrorism while minimizing civilian casualties, it has become part of the problem, rather than part of the solution.
He's writing in terms of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, but the fact is that the UN has already become part of the problem in the larger fight against Islamofascism.
It was the UN dithering that allowed Saddam Hussein to delude himself that he could go on keeping (or pretending to keep) stocks of WMD while shooting at American planes without expecting any retribution. It is the UN that refuses to stand behind its own words of condemnation when it comes to the North Koreans and Iranians developing nuclear weapons. Wars spring from such misunderstandings.
Ultimately, if as Dershowitz points out, Kofi Annan can't grasp the moral distinction between Israel and Hezbollah, why should we assume that he can understand the difference between a country like the United States and a country like Iran possessing nuclear weapons?
posted by LadybugUSA at 9:32 AM
3 Comments:
dhead: impressed by Putin, hates Bush, loves Chomsky. Wow, guess it's a forgone conclusion that you will follow Antonio Gramsci to the ends of the earth.
Why is it that you trust international law over the laws of America? They certainly haven't shown to be better in ANY way. More corrupt is all I've ever seen.
Does Hamas, Hizbollah, Syria and Iran condone torture? Other than it's their favorite thing next to rape?
Mindless sheeple follow the terrorists as if they are the oppressed victims.
And by whom did Bush get "fooled"? By Sadam, or our own intel, which has been shown to be less than perfect? I doubt that Bush ever even considered Sadam's word on anything without considering our own intel. Thus, I doubt Bush "trusts" anyone either, and I don't believe any of our leaders should concerning such matters.
I'm sure the UN staffers will be plenty happy wherever on Earth they end up, so long as there are luxury accommodations to be had.
Post a Comment
<< Home