VIEWPOINT:

Should We Leave Iraq to the United Nations?

Quite frankly, and realistically, the UN couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag. Furthermore, the UN organization is notorious for its lack of peace-keeping capability and inability to take control of crisis situations when needed. Were it not for the ongoing military, political, and financial support of the United States, the UN would have crumbled into non-existence decades ago. (Heck, we even provide its headquarters, right here in the good ol' USA. Ever wonder why we still do that?)

The fact of the matter is, most Mid-East countries despise the US, yet that doesn't stop them from accepting endless streams of American taxpayer and corporate contributions, provided via our monetary foreign aid, products, and services. The UN Mid-East countries veto US proposals and resolutions 70 to 80 percent of the time.

It is even arguable that much of the money spent by terrorist groups for their global destructive activities comes in large part from American dollars we provide--and that includes the 9/11 travesty in NYC and Washington, DC. In essence, we are providing terrorist organizations with the resources to eliminate ourselves.

Currently the US is working with Iraqi special interests to ensure that our investments there remain secure. If we were to leave tomorrow, the lives and money we invested would be lost, and we still would be at risk of further terrorist attacks.

As we proceed, we need to be asking ourselves:

• Why do we continue to support the governments of the Mid-East?
• Why does the US remain a large supporter of the United Nations?
• Why hasn't the Bush administration pursued punishment for Saudi Arabia, since most of those terrorists involved in the 9/11 activities were citizens or held ties to that nation?
• Why does the US continue to send millions of American dollars to the very same Mid-East countries that hate us so much and continue to harm us by using our own money, products, and services to defeat and annihilate us?