Ja: Misreading history and events

This is an excerpt from a long article that is interesting for its gaps in knowledge and anti-U.S. bias. H.K. Billy Burke, the author, operating on seriously flawed assumptions and facts, looks forward to the day when President Bush is navel-gazing in Crawford, TX. If Burke knew whereof he spoke, he'd pray for GWB's re-election.

Burke, in his remarkably short-sighted and unreflective essay, Rogues and Glass Houses, writes:

This is an opportunity for the UN to assert its moral authority but it has been slow to do so. It is good to know that the Secretary General has appointed a committee of 16 to consider what changes may be necessary in its charter, organisation and stance regarding pre-emption, terrorism and the changes and challenges of the 21st Century. This should have been done when the U.S. first showed signs of stepping out of line. Better late than never. It will be months before we hear the results. In my view there should be more public involvement. After two months of contacting the local office of UNDP on this subject I still have not been able to get a meaningful response.

One wonders what "moral authority" the U.N. possesses? Is the U.N. of which Burke speaks the same one that permitted genocide in Rwanda in 1994, as this report also notes?:

The international community did not prevent the genocide, nor did it stop the killing once the genocide had begun. This failure has left deep wounds within Rwandan society, and in the relationship between Rwanda and the international community, in particular the United Nations. These are wounds which need to be healed, for the sake of the people of Rwanda and for the sake of the United Nations. Establishing the truth is necessary for Rwanda, for the United Nations and also for all those, wherever they may live, who are at risk of becoming victims of genocide in the future.

In seeking to establish the truth about the role of the United Nations during the genocide, the Independent Inquiry hopes to contribute to building renewed trust between Rwanda and the United Nations, to help efforts of reconciliation among the people of Rwanda, and to contribute to preventing similar tragedies from occurring ever again. The Inquiry has analysed the role of the various actors and organs of the United Nations system. Each part of that system, in particular the Secretary-General, the Secretariat, the Security Council and the Member States of the organisation, must assume and acknowledge their respective parts of the responsibility for the failure of the international community in Rwanda. Acknowledgement of responsibility must also be accompanied by a will for change: a commitment to ensure that catastrophes such as the genocide in Rwanda never occur anywhere in the future.

The failure by the United Nations to prevent, and subsequently, to stop the genocide in Rwanda was a failure by the United Nations system as a whole.

Is this the same U.N. that did nothing while there was genocide in Bosnia in 2000? See here also. Apparently the genocide in Rwanda (1994) did not "haunt the history of the United Nations"; thus, the genocide was needed to be repeated in Bosnia, just six short years later. All the U.N. did was issue a lot of wasted words, apologies, to the people of Rwanda (1998).:

In 1999 the UN completed its own enquiry into the fall of Srebrenica, and faced its shame. 'Through error, misjudgement, and an inability to recognise the scope of the evil confronting us, we failed to do our part to save the people of Srebrenica from the Serb campaign of mass murder.' The severest criticism was directed at the then Secretary-General, Boutros Boutros Ghali, at his senior commander General Janvier (the general whom the Dutch had begged for air support), and the UN envoy in Bosnia (who had insisted there'd been no large-scale atrocity). In 2000, after a good deal of pressure (much of it from the charity Médecins Sans Frontières), the French set up a parliamentary inquiry into General Janvier's role, about which there has been much controversy; but the press and public were not allowed to hear what he had to say.
...
On July 11, 2000, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a statement: 'The tragedy of Srebrenica will forever haunt the history of the United Nations. This day commemorates a massacre on a scale unprecedented in Europe since the second world war - a massacre of people who had been led to believe that the UN would ensure their safety. We cannot undo this tragedy, but it is vitally important that the right lessons be learned and applied in the future. We must not forget that the architects of the killings in Srebrenica and elsewhere in Bosnia, although indicted by the international criminal tribunal, are still at large. This fact alone suggests that the most important lesson of Srebrenica - that we must recognise evil for what it is and confront it not with expediency and compromise but with implacable resistance - has yet to be fully learned and applied. As we mark the anniversary of the death of thousands of disarmed and defenceless men and boys, I wish to express once again to their families and friends my deepest regret and remorse. Their grief cannot be assuaged and must not be forgotten.'

As for Iraq, Saddam was committing genocide on his own people while every two-by-four with a mouth was accusing the U.S. of genocide because of U.N. sanctions. Go do a google for "U.N., Iraq, genocide." It's highly instructive.

Is this the same U.N. that instituted the Oil For Food Program according to which Saddam bribed the rest of the world to look the other way while he built up WMDs, murdered his own people, raped and robbed Iraq and generally treated the country like his own toilet and graveyard?

Is this the same U.N. that refused to enforce its resolutions against Iraq ... until the Bush Administration acted so that the U.N. might seem to be relevant? Here are a list of the U.N. resolutions that Saddam Hussein ignored while he was filling mass graves in Iraq. Go read the rest.:

Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its president,

Recalling also its resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001 and its intention to implement it fully,

This information is not difficult to come by. All Burke needed to do was go to Google and type in the appropriate keywords.

Burke continues:

IRAQI MISADVENTURE
A great deal hangs on the outcome of the forthcoming U.S. presidential election. The remaining Democratic candidates are at one in their condemnation of the Iraqi misadventure even though some to their eternal shame supported it at the time. If the Democrats win we can expect the hawks in Washington to be driven out of office and hopefully politics. Efforts would then be made if politicians can ever be trusted to mend fences with the UN, EC and the former friendly nations as multinationalism is restored. Only then will the world have a chance to become a comparatively safer place. To avoid clouding the issue Bush has an indecently short timetable for getting out of Iraq and an indecently long one for the investigation into the faulty intelligence which will not be completed until after the election. How transparently deceptive!

Most of us should breath a sigh of relief when Bush is back on his ranch with nothing to do but contemplate his navel and play billiards.

It's one thing to sit fat and happy in Jamaica and blague about the "Iraqi misadventure." It's another thing to be in Iraq and experience the Iraqi misadventure, previous to Tony Blair's and GWB's courageous decision to damn the torpedoes and go full steam ahead to Iraq. Right now, Iranian students are begging the U.S. to send troops to oust the mad mullahs in Iran.

Here's the Iraqi perspective on the U.N., Saddam, and the U.S. I'm rather fond of the last two sentences of this post.

Want to really see Iraq through the eyes of Iraqis? Here's a list of Iraqi blogs:

Iraq the Model
Iraq at a Glance
Healing Iraq
The Mesopotamian
Hammorabi. This guy maintains a database of Saddam's legacy of terror and murder.
Iraq-Iraqis

Want to know the significance of the U.S. invasion of Iraq?

Jihad Watch
Dhimmi Watch
Command Post
The Middle East Media Research Institute
DEBKAfile

As a citizen of both the Caribbean and the U.S., I say that if mending fences "with the UN, EC and the former friendly nations" means that the U.S. does not pro-actively defend itself against the Islamist tyranny that would over-run the world, then, let the fences remain broken. Let armchair pundits like Burke and others sit and smugly look down their noses at GWB and the Republicans in the U.S. These are the men who understand that a strong U.S. is vital to world peace, and a U.S. that is willing to wage war is actually ensuring that jihadist bombs don't explode in Kingston, Port of Spain, Bridgetown, and other places.

The Democrats, who view the war on terror as a police action surely do not seem to have a clue about the threat the U.S. and the world are up against. If John Forbes Kerry defeats GWB in November, batten down the hatches and buy burqas. Women around the globe will surely be wearing them, whether they want to or not.