Since when did the United Nations become the world's moral arbiter? How exactly does the UN justify the nomination and election of Libya to the chair of the Human Rights Commission earlier this year? Where is the hue and cry over Fidel Castro's latest jailing and execution of political dissidents in his country? Better yet, how exactly did the UN stop Serbian aggression - in fact genocide - against Muslims throughout the 1990s? Still, where was the UN in the Rwandan genocide in 1999? And what exactly is the UN doing to stop the ongoing slaughter of the Christian Sudanese by their own government? Simple questions, with a simple answer. The UN's lack of a moral compass is directly related to the untold death and destruction in just the last ten years alone. Yet somehow many still claim that solutions to international problems can only attain (moral) legitimacy from United Nations. I just don't get it. Putting the Catechism of the Catholic Church # 2309 and prudential judgment on the merits (and horrors) of war aside, how can intellectually honest people claim with a straight face that somehow Operation Iraqi Freedom was unjust because it did not have the blessing of the United Nations? How can good people look at just five examples of the UN's recent behavior and think for one second that the blessing of such a morally corrupt body would somehow have further justified our efforts to disarm and liberate Iraq? I, like many others, was spiritually crushed when I heard the Vatican's former ambassador to the UN made just this claim prior to end of diplomacy. Today I continue to be amazed and spiritually disheartened when I see arguments like those listed here: Briefly a response to the seven points made Jcecil’s blog: 1. Operation Iraqi Freedom was in response to unjust aggression that started on 9/11/01. It is becoming ever more evident every day. Be patient. The WMDs are coming. (Telegraph story) 2. The insinuation that the US fought a war so Vice President Cheney’s former company might benefit is unfair. The US, despite any personal or political connections of its leadership, is not in the business of fighting wars, and risking soldiers' lives, so certain individuals and connected corporations can benefit. 3. Was it right for the US to enforce UN resolutions without the backing of the UN itself? Yes – see above for more on the UN. 4. There are clear plans for rebuilding Iraq; they are unfolding daily. Europe was not rebuilt in a month. It will take time and patience. Iraq will be a better place than before. 5. If somehow shock and awe was an unjust method of warfare – whereby the Iraqi military and dictatorship was precisely dismantled in less than 4 weeks is confusing. Furthermore, the insinuation (if that is what it is) the US may have used WMD in Iraq is outrageous, expedient, and unsubstantiated. 6. Last resort is not a numerical calculus. 7. Even with our technology, hundreds if not thousands of civilians died. Hundreds perhaps, but thousands as a result of the US action is doubtful. Furthermore, why is there no criticism, implied or otherwise, of the hundreds, if not thousands of civilians who died before and during Operation Iraqi Freedom at the hands of the dying dictatorship? Given all the proof that now exists of the horrors Saddam Hussein inflicted on his citizens, these arguments, and any similar, hold less and less water. The honest fact of this whole ordeal is this: The United States no more wanted this war than we wanted September 11th. There was a minimum of six terrorist attacks directed at the United States, unprovoked, since 1993. Therefore it has taken 10 years for the United States to finally react to our ongoing blood shed. This country first avoided confrontation, and only recently (and reluctantly) stepped up to the global challenged to make the world a safer place. We did not charge into this in a cowboy bravado fashion as many continue to claim. In fact, just the opposite, we were dragged kicking and screaming into a fight we did not ask for, after a series of attacks we did not deserve. As such, when we endeavored to, finally protect ourselves, after a serious diplomatic effort, President Bush, rightly (and morally) decided he did not need the UN’s blessing to confer legitimacy on the US to rid the world of arguably the most evil man since Hitler or Stalin. He made the morally right choice.

posted by Michael Lee on 5/04/2003 10:14:00 PM | link |

---

HOME