Why is it that the UN can’t delare that Hussein (and possibly his cabinet) have crossed enough lines and have gone against what’s been determined by the UN as “World Law” and then, have him and his cabinet arrested and jailed.
I realize, of course, that trying to do this would probably escalate into further military action but, wouldn’t it “feel” a little better for Americans to at least start there?
Other option, apparently is, “Hussein, you broke the law, now, the US is going to declare war on your entire country and bomb everything in sight”.
This is not a total endorsement of W’s policy (I don’t feel I know enough about the situation to intelligently comment), but if I were he, I would have made the point that a rule without consequences is just a suggestion.
But the main reason the U.N. doesn’t do it is because they are specifically forbidden to involve themselves in the internal affairs of a country. This is a good thing – you wouldn’t want the U.N. to resolve that George W. Bush is a dangerous warmonger with weapons of mass destruction and remove him from office, would you?
Why should they? What lines are you talking about? The US is having a hard time trying to convince Western countries, let alone UN where you have a whole lot more different opinions.
Last time I checked the UN isn’t a lackey of the US, unlike Tony Blair.
Wouldn’t it be a good idea if the UN acted as a World Government. At least at this point in time, we’ve got goverments going in all types of direction (yes, even the US). Should there be some sort of World Government where, much like consequences within a given goverment, there would be consequences worldwide.
This way, we wouldn’t have to worry about what Bush is pushing. Just leave it up to the “United Nations Congress” to decide what action should be taken. If military action is radified, then we can at least assume that it’s world democracy at work and if it is not, then world democracy has chosen that path.
By the way, it’s called international law, not “world law.” The UN provides a forum in which international law is made, but not all international law comes from the UN.
You know what the UN is? It’s a building on 42th St & 1st Ave where reps from all over the world meet to chat and do some business, and occasionally use the flag as a fig leaf. It’s the Rotary with pretensions.
It is not in any way, shape or form a government - it has no executive, no legistlative and no judicial branches. Its members are not democratically elected, and the majority of them were not appointed by freely elected goverbments. How can such a organization have any sort of authority?
Face it - the U.N. is an advisory body, a nonprofit organization. It’s a club that does some charity work - just like the Shriners.
UN is somewhere where all the countries of the world can discuss things and come to agreements on what actions should be taken. USA appears to have a minority opinion on the Iraq issue, and so has little power to do the things it wants.
Only way round it is to persuade the other countries that you are right. If you cant do that you got no chance.
Alessan, yes, you’re correct. And, I’m aware of it but, I guess what I’m suggesting is that the UN BE a government . You know, a World Court type of thing. Set up just like the US with Excecutive, Legislative and judicial branch.
Any grievance from any native is brought before the “UN World Court” where it is ligitated. A decision is made by an elected panel of representatives throughout the world.
Example
US: "Your honors, the United States of America has reason to believe that Saddam Hussein and his cabinet are building weapons of mass destruction and we also have reason to believe that he will use them.
We, the United States feel the need to stop Hussein and his cabinet and we are seeking sanctioning to take military action to this end.
UN: "We’ve reviewed your submition of proof and the panel approves arrest and detention of Saddam Hussein and his cabinet but will not approve any universal bombing of Iraq at this time.
If the situation isn’t resolved upon they’re arrest, we will take matters further.
New Case.
Canada: Your honors, we believe the United States is producing much to much pollution by way of ineffecient automobiles. We seek to have them increase the effeciency of their automobiles by any means necessary.
UN: After reviewing the evidence, the panel has decided that the US is currently doing all that is neccessary to make automobiles more efficient. Therefore, no further action is needed.
See what I mean. Why are we just leaving countries to make their own decisions anymore when any action at all effects the world?