Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Charlatan
The reason the UN was "impotent" was because of the veto power certain members of the security council carry. There was plenty of impetus to do something in Rawanda but the US and others vetoed this involvment.
This veto power needs to be removed or seriously curtailed.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NCB
No.
It was the lack of leadership and moral courage, both in the UN and US, to do anything about it. Real leaders can overcome veto power.
Clinton could have formed a military response with NATO countries and left the League of Nations out of it all together. Afterall, he did it when it came to Kosovo, and the Rwanadan genocide was far worse than the Kosovo fighting.
|
NCB sure got this one right. Most of the UN members vote only in their own best interest, or with their emotional dislike of the US. How quickly the oil for food scandals, and Germany/France/China's recent economically-driven votes have been forgotten.
I have no desire to see the UN voting on where US soldiers should fight and die.