UN Supports U.S.

|

The United States won its biggest victory in Iraq since the toppling of Saddam Hussein as the UN Security Council unanimously approved a new resolution Thursday that opens the way for increased international help with reconstruction and peacekeeping.

After standing firm against attempts by France, Russia and Germany to set deadlines for surrendering power to an Iraqi interim government, Washington secured endorsement of its draft, which leaves the U.S.- and British-led coalition in control of the country until a handover is "practicable."

Whole thing here

NEXT: In Jail Because We Failed

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. does this mean we’re supposed to like the un now?

    can i call ’em “french fries” again?

    someone, please tell me what we the sheeple are supposed to think…

    *grin*

    happy friday, all!

    drf

  2. As to the vote, it was a joke – it gives the US no material advantage; the US will continue to do most of heavy lifting.

    This differentiates it from the rest of the resolutions the UN Security Council passes… how, exactly?

    The UN has never been, and is will never be, a material advantage to the USA. The new resolution gives us a diplomatic advantage, though; the people screaming about US “unilateralism” and “illegal occupation of Iraq” have had the rug pulled out from under them.

    Simply put, this transformed the liberation and rebuilding of Iraq from something “those evil Americans” are doing to something “we, the people of the world” are doing. It’s still the United States and its allies doing all the real work, of course (as usual), but now people who are actually confused enough about political and moral realities to give a rat’s ass what the UN thinks, have had a little bone thrown to them to chew on.

  3. Interesting theory, Dan. Does the Red Cross’s disaster relief program in NYC demonstrate the moral propriety of the 9/11 hijackers?

    One of the benefits of this war, at least among the NRO crowd, was that Shrub’s bold defiance of the UN meant the end of that body’s relevance in global affairs. Under the big bad Bush Doctrine, we don’t need no stinking badges.

    That was then…

  4. Dan,

    Like Bush does what he does out of moral concerns. 🙂 When you cloak yourself in false morality, anything is justifiable.

  5. rst,

    The UN vote was for US domestic consumption.

    As to siding with someone, I likely side with France because I am French. I am observant of what George Washington said once – to paraphrase, don’t be too fond of another nation besides your own. As to the opposition to the invasion, it was largely for America’s own good – I knew it would become the military and fiscal nightmare it has become. You see, we’re experienced with such having fought in Algeria, and never having lost the military advantage there, but losing the public relations war.

  6. EMAIL: nospam@nospampreteen-sex.info
    IP: 212.253.2.205
    URL: http://preteen-sex.info
    DATE: 05/20/2004 02:39:10
    Have no friends not equal to yourself.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.