well, personally i think that bush and saddam are as just as bad as each other. if saddam does have nuclear weapons then i think the UN and other countries should know because there the one who gave him it in the first place.

if saddam does have them and hes usess it then its all Bushes falt coes saddam is just defending himself.

i don't like saddam or bush but why the fuck is america getting involved in other peoples problems when they have problems of their own to deal with.

To Whom it may concern,

The United Nations is an organization the world very much needs and for which there is no substitution, the UN must exist in some form. I don't believe anybody doubts this. This places extraordinary requirements on the UN, requiring it to be: incorruptible, righteous, principled, diligent, not to be bought, prudent, evenhanded and much more. Yes, nations have their own adaptations and interpretations of what cardinal virtues are, frustrating the efforts to achieve satisfactory agreements. This requires extraordinary leaders (from as many nations as possible), who can see the true reality through the maze, having the fortitude to lead, but also willing to yield leadership in due time.

The UN gave room for questions in the late 90's what the vision of the UN General Counsel was? Electing Libya and Syria to important seats in the Human Rights and Security Counsels has degraded the electors to a laughable status! This creates also a sensation of despair and concern of what the destiny of the world will be under such leadership? The ratification of prudent resolutions with substance but without motivating perils that could be easily avoided, by just complying, has rendered such resolutions hollow. And also hurt UN authority, which eventually caused the current war in Iraq by the lack of previous and present UN resolve. Not the fact that US had the fortitude to finally take action. France has expressed dissolutions that lead nowhere but to the sidelines and obscurity. It has been pleasing to see recently that General Secretary Kofi Annan has made serious attempts to "steer the ship off the rocks". Are some UN nations then condoning well documented tyrants as Saddam Hussein's Iraq? They claim they don’t but are more furious about some member nation taking action. But have done next to nothing to battle dictatorial tyranny the previous 10+ years! This logic somehow evades me? Sorry, this train has departed the station to free Iraq and the world from this tyrant regime and the threat it projects on the future world peace.

Sincerely
Chris

brakam

bjbjbj