Seems with everyone bitching about the US occupation and calling for the UN, is that even really an option? Kerry stating that he would do it right and turn over everything to the UN.
Quote:
"The course that I have proposed is to turn over to the United Nations the full responsibility for the transformation of the government and for the reconstruction," he said.
|
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...raq/index.html
I just can't fathom the UN doing it right, or at least any better. I mean how would the security operations hold up? And please don't tell me that they wouldn't be having the problems that we are, this would easily be worse then Somalia for them. As it goes I think our "occupation" is better suited to deal with the issues of Iraq, we don't have the bureaucracy that they would. Not to mention I don't know how comfortable I would feel turning security over to the Frogs. I mean do you think that if we were to turn over control to the UN that they would be able to bring in the number of troops necessary? Or would they completely scale back security operations? Because that would be bad news bears, especially with civil war looming as it is.
Am I completely off base here?