Quote:
|
The little nations can do whatever the fuck they want, blatantly ignoring the UN, and morons you give them a free pass and hum a happy tune.
|
There are several countries that have permanent seats on the UN Security Council. Those are the countries who would normally initiate and pass UN resolutions authorizing military interventions to deal with those little countries doing whatever they want.
Since several of those countries are opposed to intervening in areas where they have no direct political interest, and since it could cost money and lives (and thus domestic political popularity) to do so, they usually show no interest in doing any of those things.
Or, to be blunt: What do you think all of the major US news outlets would say if US troops were being deployed as part of UN forces every time there was a minor conflict in Africa? It'd be politically untenable? Imagine the news? ("US lives at risk!", "A repeat of Somalia?", "What are we doing there?", "Dubious national interest in this small country", "Overall cost of this mission: two billion dollars. Meanwhile, this child is going without vital medication because of cuts to Medicare!")
That's the problem here: The US has no interest in using the UN unless American national interest is at stake, or unless Clinton's being blown in the oval office, or Bush is under attack for bankrupting America and blatantly walking over the constitution.
Obviously, China and the USSR act similarly, but they aren't driven by quite the same public hypocrisy regarding populism that the US is. Democracy hard at work here.
X.