What's next for the U.N.?

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | March 29, 2003 | March 29, 2003

[William Terrell]

I think that there are a couple points that need to be mentioned.

Congress did not declare war under the constitution. It passed a resolution authorizing the president to carry out UN sanctions against Iraq spelled out in at least three UN documents, each one empowering any member state to carry out their provisions. One provision, if I remember correctly, is the use of military force against Iraq for refusal to comply.

We are presently on a UN mission, which is exactly what Congress authorized. I don't think Congress could have legitimately declared war on Iraq using Art 1 Sec 8 Cl 11 because the bitch was about Iraq violation of UN agreements (The conflict with Iraq being originally a UN project).

Yes, America says it has potential security problems with Iraq, itself and I agree, which why I support the war. Yes, The UN security council did refuse to pass that last resolution. But we have plenty of live resolutions, so we could go on the authority of the ones already passed.

So, being on a legitimate UN mission, authority given to the executive by Congress to prosecute the UN mission, the outcome of the UN mission can be reasonably claimed under UN jurisdiction. Whether I like it or not, the UN may justifiably be able to take over the post war administration.

If and when some delegation, probably French or German, brings all these points out in session, America is gaing to have a awful time coming up with plausible reasons to demurr. Either we will have to turn the tasks to the UN or we will have to formally declare our withdrawal.

If we don't, and categorically break our agreements as a member, I think this can be rightly be seen as a breach of international law governing these kind of agreements/treaties, and will just make us look like deadbeats.

Much fun will be had by all.

[Gritty]

One doesn't need a vivid imagination to see how this would have turned out differently, but for 567 voters in Florida - and the surprising willingness of the GOP to go to the mat to persevere for justice in that election!

[AFreeBird]

Amen brother, Amen.

The alternate outcome would have been a nightmare of Biblical proportions!

[Torie]

As LBJ said about J. Edgar Hoover, it is better to have the entity inside the tent pissing out, then outside the tent pissing in. In the end, despite all the teeth knashing on FR, the UN doesn't do much harm (we won't let it), and sometimes does some good. JMO.

[Torie]

For the UN takeover to have more resonance, a lot of other rich nations are going to have to cut checks to the cause of reconstruction in the short term until the oil gets flowing. That won't happen, and I don't think the US will be under much pressure to cede real power. Of course, we want the UN there as the front organization.

[patriot5186]

Congressman Ron Paul's HR1146, a bill calling for the withdrawal of the United States from the U.N.

That would be GREAT! Contact your congressman now!