the UN. The UN does not have power in itself and cannot make threats
nor act on them. This is the nature of consensus.
The UN's power derives from the ability of the members to reach a
consensus and then act on that consensus. Since the agreements
include 10s or 100s of nations, it can't be said that the UN is
biased.
In this way the UN creates a kind of World moral yardstick.
The Bush administration cracked that yardstick in half by acting out
of consensus and insulting the institution and, therefore, took much
of the power that the UN had. The true effect of this is to give
people an excuse to act on their worse instincts.
There could be case where the US would have no choice but to act,,
however Iraq was not one. In fact Mr. Bush made a global fool of Mr.
Powell.
Ironically, the UN's consensus model has proven correct - there was no
action necessary in Iraq since there was no threat and Mr. Powell's
"evidence" was proven to be bunk.
----- Original Message -----
From: G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:36:48 -0500
Subject: Iran defies UN...and why not?
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/21/international/middleeast/21CND-IRAN.html
Why should Iran care what the UN says? They've proven beyond a doubt
they are not willing to act on their threats.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
