U.S. expected to win backing at U.N.

MSNBC ^

[fm1]

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 24 — The challenge is formidable, but U.S. and British diplomats are confident they can wring the nine votes necessary to win approval of the new Iraq resolution circulated Monday on the Security Council. The assessment is backed by other diplomats, although all agree that France, the most outspoken opponent as of now, could still use its veto power to kill the measure.

UNDER THE U.N. charter, a resolution requires nine “yes” votes among the 15 Security Council members, and cannot be vetoed by the five permanent council members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

If France did use its veto power and a U.S.-led coalition still went ahead and toppled Iraq — a distinct possibility — France would not have a voice in the future of Iraq.

[fm1]

Can't wait.

[1Old Pro]

If it allows us to finally move forward and end the mockery of national security issues we face, then fine. As far as France, they get zippo in the future.

Let's Roll.

[Taiwan Bocks]

And then what will we owe the U.N.????

Let me guess.

More subjegating of our rights to the United Nations.

[XJarhead]

This is all well and good to win a diplomatic victory, but that doesn't change the fact that the UN is still a worthless, puffed-up, leeching joke of an international debating society.

Our going ahead with an attack despite a French veto will make that point aboundantly clear. But the added bonus is that it will be a huge humiliation for France. What's not to like about that?

[RoseofTexas]

False expections!! We'll NEVER learn will we?!!

[MamaLucci]

Not to mention $$billions$$ in payoffs.
We should let them hang themselves, but we won't.
We'll cut them down and perform CPR.

[bmwcyle]

[fm1]

If we can get UN approval then we will humiliate our critics, AND decrease our future involvement in the UN without looking like a sore loser..

[6ppc]

UNDER THE U.N. charter, a resolution requires nine “yes” votes among the 15 Security Council members, and cannot be vetoed by the five permanent council members — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

Now I'm confused. If resolutions "cannot be vetoed" then how can France veto it?

[fm1]

I think that sentance was worded poorly. They're implying that it must not be vetoed in order to be approved...

[Wphile]

This is so sickening. So we have to go begging to the likes of Angola, Cameroon, Guinea, Pakistan, Chile and Mexico. Just what to we have to give away to garner their support. This isn't diplomacy. It's bribery and extortion! There is no "principle" here.

This Iraq debate has gone on way too long. Perhaps it's designed so we can get our military in place. I mean, sheesh, we don't even know about our troops in Turkey yet! But it certainly doesn't seemed to be designed at all and we look like we are getting suckered punched by a different bad actor every day. The market continues to tank and the economy has no chance of recovering until this Iraqi situation is taken care of.

I think we have given the UN way too much time to prove it's relevance. Time to get rolling and let the UN die it's justifiable death.

[vollmond]

This appears to be a win-win. France either kneels before Zod, or takes its marbles and goes home.

The only sticking point is execution of the invasion. If Iraq goes NBC on any of our ground troops, it'll get ugly fast. I pray it doesn't happen, and I don't think it will, but there are no guarantees in life.

[expatpat]

I doubt if France will veto, the consequences are too serious (and we know France is cowardly), and they are already backing off.

[InspiredPath1]

It is my understanding that Bush has already told Kofi Anan that withdrawing from the U.N. would not anger his voter base. He told him that popular sentiment in Texas is best displayed in the bumper sticker "Get the U.S. out of the U.N.".

However, we will not leave the U.N. We will stay in and marginalize them. We will help them along their chosen path - a path to irrelevancy.

[plain talk]

Poorly written and confusing article. Someone 'splain this? What are the rules regarding vetoes and resolutions in the U.N.?