WEEKLY COLUMN:
JDM vs the WORLD

SUBSCRIBE

FINE PRINT

I can’t tell you the French word for obstruction, nor can I tell you the German translation, but I can and will tell you this: If Old Europe had put half as much passion into disarming Saddam Hussein as they’ve put into thwarting American military efforts, the Butcher of Baghdad would’ve been ousted years ago.

As illustrated in recent speeches by George Bush and Colin Powell, Saddam’s done nothing to account for the weapons of mass destruction we know full well he has. Nothing. Yet France and Germany say we should give weapons inspectors more time or even give them guns. Why not give them the whole year off? It’s not like they’re going to find something.

Saddam is clearly committed to deceiving us. We caught him with his pants down in ‘91 and he’s been mooning the international community ever since. It’s high time we take his weapons and show him where to stick ‘em. Anyone who can’t see the urgency here is as frightening as Saddam himself.

But if the Franco-German alliance wants the UN to give Saddam one last “one last chance,” then it’s time we give the UN one last chance of its own.

As a favor to Tony Blair, and only as a favor to Tony Blair, Bush has said he’ll seek a second resolution from the Security Council before attacking Iraq. Fine. But if we’re going to give the French and German babies their bottles, we can’t let them suck our goodwill dry. Let the second resolution be a resolution on the UN itself—comply with reality, guys, or you’re out of here.

Think about it: The very fact that we’re calling it a second resolution is a farce. The so-called first resolution, which passed in November, was the 17th issued on Iraq in 12 years. That’s 1.42 resolutions per year.

I went to college with people whose grade-point averages were lower than that.

If, after 12 years of defiance and deception, Saddam still hasn’t done enough to move the UN, why should we expect something Earth shattering from an 18th resolution? And what do we do when he violates it? Issue him a 19th and hope for the best? Then issue him a 20th and say “collect them all”? Are we just going for the record here or what?

The UN reminds me of Jurassic Park nowadays, which is to say it smells like extinction. It’s time we kill this experiment and send it off to Bad Idea Heaven like the League of Nations and New Coke before it. What purpose does the UN solve, anyway? Every time an Israeli breathes, the UN is ready to round up the Jewish Diaspora for war crimes. Meanwhile, Iraq does whatever it wants, whenever it wants, and the UN sighs, “Oh, that Saddam is such a kidder. We’ll catch him one day.”

The double standard is so blunt it’s breathtaking.

And the UN’s level of incompetence is unparalleled. We’re looking at the biggest bunch of buttheads this side of Boss Hogg and Rosco—maybe even bigger.

Case Study No. 1: On January 20, Libya—yes, that Libya—was chosen to chair the UN Human Rights Commission, despite the fact that they’re still under sanctions for terrorism.

Case Study No. 2: Iraq and Iran—yes, that Iraq and that Iran—will co-chair the UN’s disarmament conference in May, despite the fact that Iraq has been triple-dog daring the UN to put a stop to their weapons programs for 12 stinking years.

The phrases “Iraq” and “disarmament”—and, for that matter, the phrases “Libya” and “human rights”—should never go in the same sentence, unless they’re separated by “pretty much sucks at.”

But hey, while we’re at it, let’s all enroll at the Moussaoui Flight Academy.

Suspicious though the disarmament conference co-chairs may seem, the choice was based on a “purely automatic rotation by alphabetical order,” according to a UN spokesman quoted by CNN. So, let’s get this straight: The UN, which usually plays make believe, suddenly decides to play by its own rules? Nice story. Can you tell us the one about the Tooth Fairy now? Or the Easter Bunny? Or the boy who cried wolf? If the rules actually counted for something at the UN, the issue of whether Saddam should be disarmed would’ve been dealt with back when he first made duping weapons inspectors a part of his well-balanced breakfast.

This is why we mustn’t be beholden to the whims of countries that haven’t got our best interests at heart.

Honestly, if the French and Germans are willing to claw at us all the way to Baghdad, whose side do you suppose they’ll be on when we get there? Ours? France and Germany don’t even want NATO to defend Turkey from Iraq—why would they want NATO, much less anyone, to defend America?

And what’s the worst that can happen to us if we sidestep the UN? What are they going to do, sanction us? Go right ahead! With the help of France and Germany, Saddam’s already proven we don’t have to obey the UN to gain international approval. Hell, if we ignore the Security Council altogether, the French and Germans will probably like us better than ever.

So, let the French come and pry the croissant from our cold hands. Let them make power play after pathetic power play. Let them put a smile on the face of the Hollywood Left and its Communist bedfellows. We don’t need them. We’ve already built a coalition of the conscionable and willing. The United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Denmark and the Czech Republic have publicly pledged their allegiance to our cause, and they’re not alone. We don’t need France, we don’t need Germany, and we don’t need the UN’s purposeless consent—when we topple Saddam, we’ll render all three irrelevant anyway.

As the president put it in his State of the Union, “The course of this nation does not depend on the decisions of others.” That’s not to say that the US doesn’t need allies. We do. We’ve got them, though, and the idea that America would be acting unilaterally without the UN is an outright lie.

It’s a sick world we’re living in. Our enemies target women and children, and our flimsy allies will apparently stop at nothing to prevent us from making things right. To put the fate of our freedom in the hands of a morally bankrupt body like the UN is suicide. This isn’t the UN’s war. It isn’t France and Germany’s war. It’s our war. We were attacked on September 11, 2001—not them. We have a mandate to root out Islamic extremists and their state sponsors—not them. The French and Germans don’t have to like it. They just have to live with it. Or they can go ahead and hammer the final nail in the UN’s coffin and bury their leverage in the process. It’s up to them.

In the words of the president, “The game is over.”

In other words, so long, UN, and thanks for playing.

Contact JDM

Copyright ©2007 Jonathan David Morris • web design by paviaweb.com