Originally posted by Leedogg
Why is it that most people consider the war in Bosnia good, but the war in Iraq bad, when the issues underlying them are pretty much identical? Except for one key difference. Oil. Because of this one detail, Iraq becomes a political issue.
not quite the same issue...
bosnia and the other issues in the balkans had different undertones and the situation was not quite the same... the UN itself sent peoples into the region to aid in defusing tensions...
iraq is a whole entity unto itself due not only to the situation but the manner in which it took place... the only other place that would come remotely close to Iraq would have been an invasion of North Korea except n.korea knowingly possesses and displays actual wmd's...
iraq has become a political tool due to the manner bush invaded and now due to the lack of any wmd's and the various cowboy style yeehah's we have seen since...
the removal of saddam was good for the iraqi people and the world... undoubtedly and few will disagree this assertion... but where are the wmd's ???
at this point in time 9 months after the event I frankly am getting to the point where I don't CARE if they are found.. the time given is ridiculous and we are expected to just wait until something of consequence is found? how amazing would it be if the weapons are found on the eve of the elections next year ? with bush flying to the moon to celebrate wth a mission accomplished banner ?
joke by the way..
to answer your UN questions.. the UN is a regulatory body... it does not/cannot do things unilaterally...
the oil for food deal was daft to begin with because its intended goal was to make the people rise-up... they KNEW a couple of years into the deal that saddam was not being left wanting but who wanted to end it? certainly not the US/French or the other partners of the permanent council... it was other nations who wanted it ended but their voices are not as loud... their pockets not as deep...
the nations that wanted the oil-for-food to live all had something to gain from it... be it money or personal interests... it was a problem wth misinformation all around...
as it stands though the UN does not have a history of sanctioning usage of military forces against a soverign nation... afaik only 2 times has this happened and the last was during desert storm... therein lies one of the flaws in the UN makeup...
remove the veto vote and things are simpler and more democratic and not subject to the whims of the 5 permanent member nations...