Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ArtificialBrandon
Was it an attempt to "demonize" (I prefer "expose") the United Nations? You bet your sweet ass it was. It's no different than Max posting every Iraq-related article with the word "Halliburton" located somewhere in the body as "proof" of United States treachery.
|
As Max already pointed out, the two hardly connect. Furthermore, with a mixture of international pressure, the UN has already established a committee to investigate these hearings and crack down on those who are guilty. They brought in an expert on international money laundering, and one of the judges who tried Milosevich. They have been open to objective criticism, and made few efforts to block this investigation. Annan supposedly called the current/past/whatever head of oil-for-food, encouraging him to capitulate.
Our president, following 9/11, fought the establishment of this committee tooth and nail. He used flawed and erronious intelligence data, exaggerated numbers, and flat out lies to justify a war. He has yet to apologize for this. He has appointed a traitor as the first ambassador to Iraq.
Please, give me this "corrupt" UN any day.
Quote:
|
However, more than being a mere U.N. smear, I think the article better shows that the alternatives to the war were far more deplorable.
|
How?