As we've seen before, the Bush administration uses UN resolutions to pave the way for direct military action.
The resolution passed and has the full support of the Iraqi government.
The direct flow of terrorist fighters and weapons crossing unimpeded across the Syrian boarder is a major problem - witness the recent US Marine casualties in the new "unnamed" operation in the Euphrates River Valley.
IMO, this resolution could very well signal a Presidential strategy that paves the way for direct US action against Syria with the cover of a UN resolution.
And you think this is a good thing? Didn't we use this against the Kerry campaign saying he'd go to the UN for permission before he took military action? The UN is outdated and useless and it should be closed. How many more terrorists do you think will cross the border while we shuffle paper back and forth in the UN? We don't need their approval, those are Americans dying over there not Chileans and Zimbabwayans. We promised our troops that we'd never put them under a foreign command so why our we celebrating because Bolton got the Republic of Azzkickastan to sign a worthless resolution? The decision to use American military force lies with our elected American officials not inside the outdated walls of the UN.