Great stuff by Kofi........................Tnks
<<<The Charter of the United Nations is categorical. "In order to ensure prompt and effective action by the United
Nations," it confers on the Security Council ">>>
This is the part we are not getting today - "prompt and effective"
We got some of the prompt on the fast approval of 1441
Also some of the effective , in stating there would be serious consequencies.
Prompt seems to mean a six months delay, or perhaps ten if France vetoes.
Does "Effective" mean to keep doing merely Inspecting which has been shown not to work over periods of years, or even the last many months?
And the UN in general, is not standing by their own proposal in 1441
Assume that India and Pakistan got into a bit of nuke exchange, at a rate of say one per day.
Is the UN going to convene, pass a resolution, debate for a week, take a formal vote and then, without any
power to take action or respond, vote that some perhaps reluctant Country should take some recommended but non-specific action.?
Here is a case where India or Pakistan have exercised their unilateral right to self defense.
But India shot first so that is a no-no What is the UN penalty for this?
But regardless, the action is contaminating the world with fallout and something should be done immediately on behalf of the human population.
In this case the world needs a leader, it cannot be both France and the US, because of time consuming disagreements, nor can there be a veto. Action is needed within hours.
The world's nations must somehow give up their rights and decision making to one Nation alone when crisis strikes. And there will be many who will not do that at any time or under any circumstances.
The solution is not clear, until it is then fear rules, and the US is making certain that countries who are a threat to world order or humanity in general will be dealt a crushing defeat ASAP.
Todays demonstration of the MOAB will show what power they may face.
Sig |
