John Bolton, the man who said that we don't need the UN was actually right.
Because John Bolton is the UN now, if we don't need the UN, then we don't need Bolton, it follows that we don't need the two specially when they are One entity altogether.
If you doubt, look at the new UN resolution on the Irsaeli agression on Lebanon.
The new Israeli agression on Lebanon is a month old now. It killed more than 1000 civilians, many of them children, displaced more than quarter of the population while reducing their homes and orchards to complete ruins, provoked an environmental hazard threatening the coasts of Lebanon, Cyprus and Syria, did not accomplish its objectives in eliminating the Hezbollah 'threat' in a month of cowardly strikes and technically unequal fighting, but hopes to do so in the coming hours before Olmert's cabinet could meet to discuss the Israel friendly UN resolution...
There are lives at stake, a country's sovereignty, the hopes of the people who are in shelters and displaced but all UN diplomats can do is to formulate a resolution vague where they need to be clear, ambiguous where they need to be sharp thus comforting Israel in its own ambiguity in conducting the offensive, one sided and obsequious toward Israel, because they don't aknowledge the Israeli agression, where they need to be neutral and respect the victims and the country who is bleeding from this agression.
Al-Jazeera reports: ''Yet the resolution does not call for an immediate Israeli withdrawal - and the White House said Olmert in his call to the White House "thanked President Bush for the work he had done on the UN resolution on the Lebanon crisis."
Who needs the UN ? The poor and the weak when attacked by the powerful but when the UN sides with the powerful ignoring their actions, the weak don't need the UN and they will have to manage their problems alone. So, what will happen next in Lebanon ?
My guess is that the UN resolution is not going to work. I read Sanyura's opinion piece in the Guardian yesterday and Lebanon's requirements for peace as formulated in his opinion are not respected by the resolution. One of these two things will happen: either Sanyura and the resistance will stick to their demands and the war will go on with the danger of its extension to a regional war...or there will be a divide in the Lebanese position and Sanyura's government will not last and Hezbollah, with the support of the majority of the population, will take hold of the country. The war will continue, extends to a regional war more quickly with the other burden of an internal civil war provoked by factions unhappy to see Nasrallah in command...
In both cases, that is exactly what Israel and the US were looking for, a regional war and the completion of the neo con project for a new middle east...Isn't Israel's initiative to ignore the resolution and continue the offensive a clear sign that nobody is willing to waste time with this resolution ? The UN resolution would have served this goal, ignoring the obvious, Israel's agression while paving the way for the less obvious in the public opinion, a regional war, exactly as the previous resolution 1559 served as a premise for this current Israeli agression !
Read my colleague Ur-Shalim on the continuation of UN diplomacy by Israeli means and on the new UN resolution !
When the UN was not to Mr. Bolton's like, Mr.Bolton was unhappy and he didn't need the UN, now that he is the UN, nobody needs the UN anymore !
UPDATE: Shimon Peres spoke to Radio-Israel on Saturday August 12th and affirmed that the UN resolution justifies Israel's offensive on Lebanon. He said also that this resolution was the result of Israel's military pressures ! Killing more than 1000 civilians and destroying Lebanon's infrastructure is 'military pressure' on the UN according to this Nobel Price for PEACE Winner. Israel said it will accept UN resolution but needs until monday to stop hostilities. They hope meanwhile to occupy the south until Litani
Hassan Nasrallah spoke to Al-Manar TV today. He said that Hezbollah won't oppose the UN resolution, even if he considers it unjust and that Hezbollah is ready for a complete cessation of hostilities but will fight every Isareli occupation soldier left in Lebanon.
WHO IS THE TERRORIST ?
''My people decide the truth in sixty countries every morning. And in every one it's different.''
Since March 29th 2006
1 comment:
The United States "war on terrorism" is being waged as an idiots war. They are moping up the water running across the floor before fixing the leaky pipe.
To wage an effective war on terrorism one must look at the roots of terrorism. These roots exist due to decades of Middle East problems. No military action has ended terrorism. The reality is terrorism continues to grow. If military action defeated terrorism, Lebanon and Palestine would be most peaceful places on the face of the earth.
One might think those pursuing this idiot's war do not have the good sense god gave a billy goat but these are educated people. The tragedy is they are educated with decision-making based on false beliefs. The "we do not negotiate with terrorists," moto has worked against the resolution of terrorism. The Bush Administration of "evil people" vs "good people" has only contributed to a false-belief system. Some in world consider the Bush Administrations actions to be evil. Some in the world are simply confused about the schizophrenic foreign policy. Some consider the Bush Administration terrorists.
For decades the war on terror has been fought by doing the same thing, the same way, and expecting different results. This is the type of thinking that one might find in a mental hospital, not in the highest levels of governments. The "axis of evil," Iran, Syria and North Korea, as stated by President Bush draws a line of war in sand, so how can the United States expect peace given those circumstances? "If you are not with us, you are against us," is another exclusive statement refusing any common negotiation. The major error of the war on the terror is the Bush Administrations "my-way or the highway" aragont thinking.
Upon such a foundation, peace is impossible because peace has been excluded from the onset. Upon such a foundation the world becomes polarized. This should not be surprising considering the Bush Administration has poloarized the United States. The black and white thinking of the administration and the refusal to consider gray is also a color dooms any chances of peace in a complex world of different belief systems. It lays a foundation for and idiot's war.
Post a Comment