Would be a homonym with “un-logic,” if such a noun actually existed:
Seoul went to the Security Council to seek the global rebuke of the North, but China objected to a resolution that specifically blamed its clients in Pyongyang. Thus the Security Council retreated to writing a resolution that condemned the act of aggression but named no aggressor…
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice tried to make the best of this embarrassment by saying the message to the North was “crystal clear” and that “The Security Council condemns and deplores this attack. It warns against any further attacks. And insists on full adherence to the Korean Armistice Agreement.”
The torpedo couldn’t be reached for comment, but the North Koreans quickly claimed what a spokesman called a “great diplomatic victory” because the U.N. had failed to back up South Korea’s allegations against the North. “We have made it clear that this incident had nothing to do with us,” he said.
More amazing still, the resolution that didn’t bark is being hailed as a deft way to lure North Korea back to the six party talks over its nuclear program. Follow the logic: Since the North wasn’t condemned for doing what everyone knows it did, the North’s leaders might now be appeased enough to return to the nuclear talks they walked out of last year. Sink a ship, and gain new diplomatic respect. If former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton had predicted this scenario, the New York Times would have accused him of trying to undermine the credibility of the U.N.
It would scarcely be possible for Bolton to improve on the work of Turtle Bay’s own diplomats here.
Unlogic is double plus ungood.
Said in the voice of Napoleon Dynamite – “Idiots!”
Seriously, how much longer are we gonna waste our time with the UN? When will the Western democracies finally pull out and form their own organisation?
Phalanx8,
It will obviously take a swing in the “Western Democracies” back toward ‘Democracy’… right now the UN-Logic winds are bowing exactly the way our administration prefers… more toward UN-Democratic, UN-Principled, UN-Offensive philosophies.
I agree, we and many of our formally identified as “Allies” need to make clear that catering to illicit, corrupt governments to buttress the facade of diplomacy is not our idea of the purpose of the United Nations. There comes a time when the words “Tolerate” and “Accept” need not be included in every resolution!
-JC
When the “Human Rights Council” is comprised of nations widely reputed for Human Rights violations of the significance, some one in the Administration should note the feeling of a well swung Louisville Slugger® sized Cluebat™ on the side of their skull…That might be Hillary, but I guess if Bill is still thinking he’s got a shot at Secretary General before his ticker quits ticking, she has to just deal with the imposed synthetic TBI.
Speaking of Hillary, how’s that “sanctions with real teeth, within the next few weeks” against Iran working out?
You know, the ones that Obie said (back in January) that he and Hill wouldn’t rest until they got?
We need to get OUT of the UN before it turns completely into “Kleptocrats R Us”, if it hasn’t already. And we need to take our big-ticket friends (well, any we have left) with us.
Precisely why every tin-horn dictator and Hezbollah supporter in the M.E. and S.A. wants his own nuke capability.
This is Bush’s fault. If only he hadn’t recess appointed Bolton, all would be well.
Another resolution. Those have been shown to be SOOOOOOO effective. If they really want to remove the risk of Global Warming, Gore should get behind a resolution to close down the UN and all the hot air emminating from that Babylon.
Like so many problems before the UN this would be so EASY to solve.
Let’s see:
SOKOR, stop sending food ships north.
Stop trading north.
Stop the whole Kaesong thing.
Blockade the north. Tell China to bite you since they’d have to attack through the north or attack your neutral shipping and everybody knows that we and Japan are just dying to get involved in another war with China. Oops, the last war is still on, never ended.
But then there’s the Seoul issue and elevenity million cannons pointed at it and within range to rain down ruin, death and destruction. Kind of screwed up there didn’t you? Notice how the Min Def et al all moved way way south years ago? Well, maybe it was just COS Army and Navy. Osan is just out of range of artillery.
[...] In other U.N. related news, the Security Council on Friday denounced the sinking of a South Korean ship–but managed to do this without denouncing anyone in particular for having sunk it. [...]
As a member of the Security Council the US holds veto power over any attempt by the UN to enforce peace and security in the world through military force. Which, given the UN has no military force to speak of, pretty much means the position is only worth it because we can deny the Russians and Chinese should they decide to get annoying.
The rest of the UN isn’t worth a bucket of warm spit.
I’d rather see us stay in the UN, continue to listen to the tin-pots and the be-ribboned little self-important people, and do absolutely nothing. I’d like to see us contribute nothing of monetary value beyond our yearly dues. Oh, and that building they meet in? Comes out of our dues. If an issue gets to the Security Council, issue the veto and leave for the golf course as soon as the subject is broached.
The UN is an addict to western money and an abusive partner. I see no reason to enable either behavior.
– Max
What Max said.
“Minions! Unleash the sternly-worded memo!”
Watch it Bill. You’re about to breach the normal decorum of the site by invoking occult powers.
This has been going on since 1955. They’ve shot down unarmed US Navy recon aircraft, seized a USN ship in international waters, shot a guard across the DMZ, axed one to death on the bridge, kidnapped japanese civilians, had numerous naval skirmishes, exploded a nuke, and now sunk a ship with the loss of 56 lives. and what has happened? We give food aid, we kowtow to every demand, we send former presidents over with gifts of liquor and cognac praising the idiot Kim to release two “spies”, and the UN is now REALLY serious about sanctions. Roosevelt and Churchill’s magnanimous idea about a post WWII assembly of nations resolving differences peacefully and negating the requirement for forceful actions is long dead and can’t even be scrapped off the highway
me: I’m betting on the NORKS.
G-Man,
It’s actually one of the last nightmares on earth.
The ROKS don’t want them after all. They saw how that ate Germany. The Chinese don’t want them and never did. You’ll note China invaded Vietnam but has left NORK to itself. Even if one instantly pounded flat Pyongyang the artillery over Seoul would open fire and not stop till all were dead or out of ammo. Steely purpose is almost the definition of any Korean.
This is one of the situations one sits back and contemplates, “how the devil are we going to fix this” and the answer is, wait. We can take them down in a heartbeat but the cost is beyond tragic. If they pull the trigger, we’ll do it. If the ROK pulls the trigger, we’ll do it. It is a decision that can only be made on the peninsula.
Thank God the UN is no longer relevant or involved.
I all the time I have spent in Korea, working with the ROKAF, the Navy, all of ‘em, I am convinced that our main purpose is to hold the two of them apart. I haven’t met a ROKAF pilot that doesn’t want to go downtown on day one. They are convinced that if they can just kill whoever is in power, all of their families will be reunited – which is all they want. They understand what an economic basket case the DPRK is, but that family reunification issue is huge. Look at a Korean name. Family name is first, for a reason. All of the millions of Kims in the south want to free all of the Kims in the north. But they will certainly want us, and the Japanese, the pay a big part of that bill.
Pretty much sums up the effectiveness of the UN. That and the recent fiasco with the disarmed UNIFIL soldiers in Lebanon.