Quote:
Originally posted by Bingo@Dec 2 2004, 08:57 PM
Well clearly my question was pointed toward the former group ... those that said they needed UN agreement before going in.
That was a pretty good sized camp.
|
And I don't see any connection between the two. I highly doubt that the security council members had little or anything to do with the oil-for-food program. The number of people involved at the UN is pretty significant, especially for the security council members. The UN ambassador does not oversee not have final say on every decision. To me it would be like blaming your communications manager for a problem in HR. I just don't see how the oil-for-food program, corrupt or not, would have any bearing what so ever on the decisions of the security council, especially if the intelligence presented was as damaning as the US tried to imply it was. No change because I don't believe it has any bearing.