thjs,
I enjoyed reading your post. I do have a question. You state:
Quote:
But consider this: the efforts to stop terrorism will never succeed if European and Arab friends do not help. It's safe to say they currently feel alienated. So from that perspective, and considering the U.N. wrangling leading up to this point, the U.S. should include them as a "good faith" and healing jesture.

Whom do you refer to as our our European and Arab friends ? What countries specifically?

Why do you believe that it will be a healing gesture? And in what ways can it heal the breach between these nations when some hold diametrically opposed values? How can they reach concensus?

Thank you.

Wolf,
I am beginning to agree with your view on the United Nations. I became increasingly concerned with the United Nation's more radical view of appeasement. I was particularly concerned when they kicked the United States out of the Human Rights Commission, yet left Sudan, a government that promotes slavery, not to mention Cuba, Fidel just gave a dissident a 27 year prison sentence for having in his possession Johnson's book Who moved my cheese?,not to mention Syria, and Lybia, Lybia heads the commission.

The questions for me are: Is the U.N. a significant body anymore? Or has its significance been diminished over time? Or has it deminished since the end of the Cold War?
Is it trying to accomplish more than it is possible or reasonable to accomplish? Do all countries hold the same universal values?

I believe that there is a role for this body, such as UNESCO, etc., but I'm not sure that it is a body that we can reach concensus anymore.
What do you think?
_________________________
The world is a book, and those who do not travel read only a page.
--St. Augustine (354-430)