Don’t even go there with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran’s president said today of any such action by the Security Council: “The Iranian nation won’t give a damn about such useless resolutions.”
He’s probably right about that.
PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.
Someone will figure out a way to blame this on the US. Such as, “This is Bush’s fault because he ignored the UN before invading Iraq. That established the precedent of bypassing and ignoring the UN. If only Bush had been willing to work with and through the UN process, Iran would now, too!”
Wanna bet?
Steven:
President Bush is using the U.N., multilateral, non unilateral approach to Iran. Ditto Darfur. That is why Iran is getting the bomb and the death toll will continue to rise in Darfur. The Arab bloc is blocking any effective regional response to Darfur and this allows the rest of the world to dither and bloviate while the murders continue. We are taking the slow diplomatic response to Iran to produce a resolution or some form of sanction. Russia and China have given everyone the heads up that they won’t back any form of sanction that will cause any harm to Iran so,as usual, Iran will ignore the U.N. like every other roque regime has done for the last 20 years. What’s the U.N. going to do, call Iran bad names? heh.
Diplomacy is always the best first response. But multilateral U.N. diplomacy has become a convienent cover to mask the worlds true intentions. The U.N. translation regarding Iran is ignore all the tough talk, if Iran decides to become a part of the nuclear we won’t lift a finger other then to wag it.
Regarding the Sudan the translation goes like this. We could go in and stop this right now, but we will use the excuse of trying to build a regional response to the problem to hide our inaction, we know that the Arab bloc will protect their fellow Muslim murdering government and block any real response, and we are not going to do a thing. We will cry at the funerals and we will make Hotel Rwanda Redux in 8 years and bite our lips.
steven;
The blame Bush trend has already started. I caught a snippet of some talking head that was saying that the reason Bush can’t get results is because Bolton hurt the feelings of the rest of the U.N. That makes sense. “We are going to let Iran have the bomb because Bolton pissed us off.’ The U.N. is going to let Iran have the bomb because they would never lift a finger to stop them, Bolton or no Bolton. What does the U.N. do when faced with a roque nation with a spine? Endless debate followed by feckless resolutions that accomplish nothing.The Hutu’s, the U.N. backed down, Milosevic, the U.N. backed down, Kim of North Korea, no action. Iran……. no action. Lot’s of talk, accomplishments zip.
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you’re probably going to manage to get just about anything you want vetoed in the security council.