Counting the Votes at the U.N.

Hillary Clinton is only the latest of many Democrats to urge that the U.N. be given a larger role in postwar Iraq. Of course, neither she nor her Democratic colleagues have explained how we would go about doing this, given that the U.N. has largely pulled up stakes and abandoned Iraq until the security situation is improved. By us.
More fundamental, however, is the fact that the U.N. is essentially hostile to American interests and values. It would be unprecedented in human history for a nation to cede control over its foreign policy, voluntarily, to a hostile group of foreign nations.
For statistical proof of how antagonistic the United Nations is to our interests, see this article titled “U.N. General Assembly Voting Habits” by Fred Gedrich of the Freedom Alliance. Gedrich uses as raw material the State Department report on U.N. voting practices which Congress requires the Department to produce; here are the figures for 2002:
“187 UN General Assembly members, out of 90 votes cast, voted against U.S. positions by a 69 percent to 31 percent margin on issues such as terrorism, arms control, human rights and the Middle East.
“The 114 members of the Non-aligned Movement voted against U.S. supported positions 78 percent of the time. This group includes all the world

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses