Dear Editor:I am writing in response to the article, “Bush, America fill United Nations’ proverbial shoes,” which appeared in the Thursday, Sept. 26, issue. Obviously, the writer is another one of the uninformed masses who are pushing strongly for war with Iraq. He cites claims that the United States is “footing the bill for everything,” and should have “the freedom to act without restraint.”
Allow me to point out a couple of things that the author and everyone who is a citizen should think about.
The United Nations’ main purpose is to promote world peace and cooperation among its nations. The organization may push for other ideals or goals, but this is its main purpose for being in existence.
There are 190 members of the United Nations, each with one vote. The United Nations is also made up of six bodies, each with their own duties. One of the six is the Security Council, which is the most powerful.
The responsibility of the Security Council is to maintain international peace and restore order when conflict arises.
There are five permanent members of the Security Council and each have the power to veto any decision with which they do not agree. The five members are: the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia, and China.
These countries are, in turn, the most powerful of all the nations in the United Nations. No matter how badly George W. Bush and others may want to enter war with Iraq and still comply with the United Nations and the Security Council, they can not do so without all five members agreeing that that is the only method of resolve.
As the writer pointed out, this does not mean that the United States can’t act alone and without the compliance of the United Nations, but in doing so would jeopardize the reputation of the United States, and make them solely responsible for any mistakes, blunders or mishaps which might take place. Acting alone would be a horrible decision for this country.
The point of the United Nations is to promote peace, and what good is the organization if one of the leading members does not comply with the organization’s terms.
The author also points out that the United Nations has no military power. This is untrue.
The United Nations can send peacekeeping troops to an area of unrest; i.e. the mission of the organization. Also, it can call for a joint military effort.
I’m not saying that I am not for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein or for just sitting still and twiddling our thumbs. But, I do not believe that we have exhausted every other means to achieve our goals.
War is a terrible thing for anyone, and I believe we should do everything in our power to avoid it.
If, in the end there is no other choice, then we should resort to war. This will not only save the lives of soldiers from our own country, but soldiers and civilians the world over.

Dean Burress

Author