Perhaps the situation in Iraq would not be so bad now if Mr. Annan had stood his ground at an earlier stage when he allowed himself to be bullied by George Bush.
The U N was found to be weak when Bush wanted his way, and was hungry for war.
Now Mr. Bush does not know what to do with Iraq, and seems to wish he had never invaded - which he had no right to do.
Would the situation be as bad if the U N had stood it's ground, and not allowed itself to be intimidated by Bush?
I worry for the future of the U N if people like Bush can be allowed to push it around.
2006-11-27 23:18:10 · 12 answers · asked by emeraldisle2222 5 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Interesting enough question - the problem lies with the manner in whcih the US operates unilaterally. Your summary is fundamentally correct in part - that the US wishes it had not gone it - to all intents and purposes alone as it could if it had done what the UN had wanted now pass the buck and pass the baton to UN forces.
Kofi Annan to his credit did try to stand up but since the US chose to completely bypass the UN it made the job of standing up to the world's only superpower a redundant issue. The US have over the years damaged the credibility of the UN - denying it the funds that it should pay as a member state that a few years ago nearly bankrupted an organisation that was determined to try and findd the best international solutions to resolving conflict aside from gung-ho military action. The US has also damaged the credibility by its ability to block and veto every motion against Israel even when human rights have been blighted by civilian bombings etc.
The UN is a credible organisation that requires all member states to abide by its rules, pay their dues and act in accordance with their rules...as always the US has chosen to ignore it when it suits and attempt to use it or subvert it when it chooses. The fear for the UN is grounded and more needs to be done to defend it from any single entityt or power or nation state.
2006-11-27 23:32:08 · answer #1 · answered by Gilly S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq was breaking the UN resolutions and the UN did nothing an let them.
You could say then, that Bush acted where the UN failed to uphold their own rules set against Iraq.
It's just unfortunate that whilst Sadam wasn't abiding by the UN sanctions, BUT he did also have the state organised in that Iraq up untill the US went in had one of the best medical and health setups in the Arabic states and also stuff like regulation with regards to other areas.
In a documentry recently there was a doctor saying that since Sadam was taken away more people are coming in from severe food poisoning because there is no supervision over the restaurants and food places that was in place when Sadam was there.
2006-11-27 23:45:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN is heading the way of its predecessor - the League of Nations- powerless to stop powerful nations. Which is a shame I beleived in the UN but it couldn't stop Bush and Iraq is now paying the price. Iraqis didn't care who was shia or sunni coz they were nationalist about their country but now that has gone to pieces and I know some iraqis that wished america didn't go to iraq at all, they hate saddam but would rather have saddam and united than what is going on now
2006-11-28 01:47:38 · answer #3 · answered by PrincessNatalie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What the hell should Kofi Annan do? ask US to withdraw troops from Iraq? then iraq would have a full scale civil war on their hands.. !!!
at the moment violence is being contained by the presence of British and American troops..
and you are right.. Bush junior should not have invaded iraq.. the job should have been finished properly in the first gulf war
2006-11-27 23:27:26 · answer #4 · answered by rup 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You mean Back Hander Annan..! havent you heard about his & his Son's - nice wee earner - out of Iraq... Thats why he is about to sail off into the Sunset in December....The UN is a Quango of sneaky bendy politicians...
2006-11-28 09:19:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What happens if the combined forces of hezbollah, syria, iran, cuba, hamas, al qadea, jemaah islamiyah and china invade america by surprise? the future UN secretary general should call that war illegal. By the way, screw beijing.
2016-05-22 21:54:49 · answer #6 · answered by Caitlin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the UN is bloody useless,they just stand back and shake their heads at these countryswho have terrible human rights abuses.all talk no action as far as i can see.
2006-11-28 08:48:32 · answer #7 · answered by Belfast Bap!! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush wanted war, before he was elected.
2006-11-27 23:33:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you gotta pretend that the UN doesnt exist. just like the US does. UN means NOTHING TO THEM.
2006-11-27 23:21:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
he should know, whats he going to do about it, ask for advice from darfurs leaders?
2006-11-28 15:49:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋