Iraq

[Terrance]

> 
> >
> > B) The arguments for action against Iraq cannot be sustained under either
> > of the primary foreing policy paradigms - principled/pragmatic.....
> 
> "The UN can order troops into Iraq based on the resolutions it has.
> ...... The UN can act  legally and without violating its principles."
> 
> I spoke inexactly... I was referring to unilateral action on the part of
> the US.....Of course, the UN can act as you describe - though I think that
> it must avoid a situation where it is seen selectively enforcing binding
> resolutions...and I say this as a supporter, in most respects, of
> Israel....

Unilateral action? There will be none, so this is not an issue. 

Yes,  this danger of selective enforcement is real. And the UN must be
very careful. 
Particularly when it decides to enforce agreements with violence. 



> 
> "In fact, the risks of not solving this crisis, with violence or
> negotiations or some combination of violence and diplomacy, are great
> for the UN. It must act. It is acting. It should be applauded for it's
> efforts thus far."
> 
> This I don't see.....There was no great urgency, either on the part of the
> UN or the US, to "get cracking" on Iraq until after 9/11......there seemed
> to be considerable satisfaction with the status quo - the embargo, which I
> have supported here before was sufficiently devastating that Saddam was not
> far from exhaustion.....The UN has been driven to this by the naked
> ambition of the Scrub administration, and to the extent that it has served
> to thwart such, I too applaud its efforts......should this have the
> collateral effect of further hastening Saddam's demise, even better......

Certainly 9-11 changed the shape of things.  There is no doubt that the
Bush administration wants to restructure the balance of power in the ME
and that 9-11 opened a window of opportunity for them to do so. 
However, Iraq is an urgent concern of the UN. That it is US led urgency
is fairly obvious to the world, but it is still an urgent issue for the
UN and it must be dealt with. Moreover, it is not simply or only naked
US ambition. There is no doubt that this administration is a very
aggressive one and getting more so by the day (Powell's presentation was
all theater, but for the fact that he had his hawks nose and talons on
and they are for real).  The French are fools. They'll be cut out like
they were in Afghanistan if they don't give the USA the SC vote. They
will give it. There is too much at stake.