Why do conservatives point to Bush efforts to use the United Nations to avoid war .They want it dismantled?

Question

Seems conservatives who support Bush find ways real or not to defend Bush .
They have no use for the United Nations unless it is to back up a weak argument that Bush tried to avoid the war .

Answer 1

Bush is the First president in U.S. history to refuse United Nations election inspectors….during the 2002 U.S. elections…following that he has done everything possible to render the entire United Nations irrelevant
And in the case of the non existent weapons of mass destruction which Bush used as an excuse for the illegal Iraq invasion….As for Iraq's alleged "weapons of mass destruction", the problem for Bush was that United Nations inspectors had been scouring Iraq for months and had found no evidence of the existence of any. The Americans tried to concoct such evidence (such as Colin Powell's claim of a "poison factory" in Northern Iraq, later shown to be non-existent, and documents purporting to show that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from Niger, later shown by the IAEA to be forgeries) but only ignoble and servile lackeys such as the prime ministers of Britain, Australia and Spain pretended to believe this evidence. Nevertheless the Bush administration maintained this rationale for its invasion of Iraq, and in fact continues to do so.
But after the regime of Saddam Hussein was overthrown, and US forces were able to inspect any place in Iraq they wished to, where were these "weapons of mass destruction"? None were found. That's because by November 2002 there weren't any, as former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter had already told the U.N. Security Council. The US rationale was a fiction, as was eventually revealed.
But the very few remaining Bush supporters fail to see reality and fail to recognize how this President is dismantling international treaties and ruining America’s reputation among our allies by making further gigantic diplomatic blunders such as Withdrawing from the World Court of Law, Refusing to allow inspectors access to U.S. prisoners of war and by default no longer abiding by the Geneva Conventions.

Answer 2

I'm unsure which answer/s you're looking for. I like to point out - for instance - that until this administration spoke up, most folks didn't know what I & others knew -- that Russia, France & China were doing Business as Usual under the table with Saddam, contrary to their own public votes as permanent members of UNSC all those years.

In addition, US & UK taxpayers alone were paying to contain Saddam, ENABLING Russia, France, & China to do their business with impunity for all those years since the one-sided cease-fire Saddam signed after his Kuwait adventure.

One could mention Oil4Food. One could mention Saddam paying off a certain Russian, and others, with oil.

Those final votes on that issue in UNSC showed that the UN has no more teeth nor cojones than its predecessor League of Nations.

Other revelations we'd learned while Clinton held office was the perfidy, sleaze, fraud & misuse within other UN committees on the US taxpayers' Dollar that didn't get wider exposure until President Bush's administration. (*I call that well-earned negative reinforcement.)

To say what I said, the UN's stated purpose and intent has long back been lost in translation, mired in inaction, perfidy & individual greed for power, but they still to this day want that real estate AND YOUR US taxpayer Dollars.

Do you like that?

Answer 3

While I'm not 100% for Iraq war (should have been planned better), it sure shows that after all the non-binding resolutions, and Saddam moving the WMDs by camel across the desert, probably into Syria, that the UN is just worthless.

It's corrupt and ineffective. I believe the UN has outlived its usefulness in the world.

Answer 4

Personally I think he should be given an award for being such a good Democrat. But that was before I saw him on steroids (Obummer). I wonder, will you wise up after unemployment tops 11%. Or are you a government employee flunkie that couldn't survive in the private sector anyway?

Answer 5

The U.N. is useless. I think the un building in New York would be better fit as another motel. The U.N. issued 59 sanctions on Saddam Hussein before Bush took action

Answer 6

As an apposing argument, why is it that so many democrats and liberals seem to want to give the US to the first terrorist that comes along and not fight for it?

BTW, I'm not a republican.

Answer 7

Cause the UN is a democrats god. So it shows that democrats are fighting against their own ideals as a party.

Answer 8

Yeah, Bush tried to avoid the war like a 3 year old tries to avoid Xmas.

Answer 9

Who wants the UN dismantled? Conservatives? I don't think so.

Answer 10

Did you think that up by your little old self?