Bad Imperialist

The Wall Street Journal ^ | April 8, 2003

[WaveThatFlag]

The news reports about last night's Anglo-American summit in Belfast played up the "trans-Atlantic differences over the U.N. role in postwar Iraq." If only France, Germany and Russia were so lucky.

Like screen starlets past their prime, these three members of the "camp of peace" (joined by China and Syria) preen and strut, expecting the U.S. and Britain will invite them to the ball. But we've been there. The U.S., smarting from the shenanigans at the Security Council this winter, won't be giving Jacques Chirac any other opportunities to pretend to be a world leader.

[Cicero]

I'm not at all sure there should even be a role for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. These are the people who were responsible for building and protecting the Palestinian terror camps, where hatred has been breeding for two or three generations. Even the food distribution is questionable, since they seem to manage mainly to feed the wrong people and starve the needy. As for UN medical help, do we really need to send in a bunch of UN condom-distribution teams, complete with abortionists and tubal litigators?

[Cathryn Crawford]

The U.N. itself has proven the laughability of the notion that it is a serious international body with the ability to create and sustain a government in such a volatile place.

The U.S. would defeat its own purpose if it liberated Iraq only to turn it over to the U.N. - the U.N. can't even stand up under its own power!

[rageaholic]

Is this Mosque in North America with its angry mulla not imperialism of another sort?

[I still care]

I was watching Pat Robertson and he was interviewing some high level Iraqi. (I can't remember his name but I saw him on FOX before). He said the UN is the worst choice to lead the post Iraq government. He said the UN is "corrupt and inefficient", and that they are not a governing body, but a club where members jockey for power.

[Credo]

The UN is a joke. Let the Iraqis figure out what they want.

Another matter is our State Department. They've done a fine job too. Remember the last ambassador to Iraq actually told Saddam that the US would have no interest in a dispute between Iraq and Kuwait. That was in late July 1990.

[homeagain balkansvet]

If that were a picture of a Catholic church you'd be called a bigot.

If that were a picture of a synagogue, you'd be called a bigot.

Both for very, very good reason. Ahem.

[rageaholic]

Sure. On the other hand how many churches or synagogues spout "Death to America" from the pulpit as an official policy? See below:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/888045/posts

[Cathryn Crawford]

Our State department has gotten better since the days of Albright; however, I don't think Powell is that much better. He's wishy-washy, and he hasn't shown himself to be a wise diplomat. Look how De Villipen played him like a fiddle at the Security Council.