|
Archive main page |
click here for a bigger sunsetOne small voice in the proud tradition of FreeBlogging*Saturday, February 01, 2003posted by gbarto at 5:43 PM:For clarification (in response to Natalie Solent), like President Bush, I'm willing to give a week or two to get France and Germany to come around because it would be useful to have them on board. But she's dead right that they are dead weights, in particular that the UN is at this point a total loss. I think one of the greater problems is that we haven't really pushed the issues I mentioned. President Bush's speech asking the UN to live up to its most noble purposes and its own bloody resolutions was a good start, but we need to be making more widespread use of shame to demand that those who would lecture actually get off their butts and do something useful. And that they be written off as useless if they are unwilling. I should have been more clear in my post, for in proposing to still try to get France, Germany and the UN on board, it was not for our sake, but theirs - giving them one last chance to have utility in the international political sphere. And the argument that I was making was not that we wait so we could enjoy their help, but that we are waiting - even as evidence against Iraq builds - so that we can either shame them into living up to their committments or leave an absolutely clear public record of their moral unseriousness.When I say that Iraq is big, but the UN is bigger, what I mean is that taking on Iraq is one challenge out of many, but forcing the UN to either stand for civilization or yield its remaining moral authority to the English-speaking, liberty and capitalism driven societies (the Anglosphere) and those who stand with it could have a far more profound impact on the war on terror and the direction of international affairs. If waiting a few more weeks is what it takes to make the case as to why we don't need to listen to France's security council veto, it will well be worth it. * * *
French Elections, 1st round
|