Ah, the US at it's ambassadorial best

[caffeine]

from am article on Brown's speech at the UN: [Malloch Brown is the deputy secretary-general]

Of course, Malloch Brown was not so crass as to name Bolton. The clever thing to do would have been to ignore the speech, but since Bolton has all the diplomatic skills of a bull elephant in heat, he rose to the bait...


from http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060626/iwilliams

Comments

Re: I read it too

[vanaabegra.livejournal.com]

You are right about changes needed at the UN, there is no doubt about that. The "Food for Oil" fiasco was bad. People got weathly by circumventing and manipulating policy, but I think that happens pretty much everywhere. Not that I am defending it.

However, I think that if the US really wanted to affect change within the UN, we would send someone with tact who could actually make positive changes. I think the UN has a role to fill, and I would like to see the US take an active role in reshaping the UN.

Places such as the Security Council and the Human Rights Council need work, but the UN cannot just be a body that rubber stamps US actions; our government is not always correct, and could use an international sounding board.

I don't have time right now for anything more cohesive than that.

I will sum up by saying I think the UN needs some re-org, but I don't think it should be disbanded, and I think there are better ways to handle it.