That's what Arnold Kling would like to ask the presidential candidates.
Do you believe that the rifts within the United Nations indicate moral obtuseness on the part of (a) the United States or (b) other members of the UN?
I think the ideolgocial lines could be split right down with that question.
Today, a consumer of news media could be forgiven for thinking that the United Nations passed a completely different resolution than what actually was passed prior to the war. You might think that the decision of whether or not to go to war was conditional on whether a complete and accurate description of Iraqi programs of weapons of mass destruction was supplied by the United States and Great Britain.
In fact, the critical resolution required Iraq to provide a complete and accurate account. They failed to comply. Other members of the UN, in their moral wisdom, said, "Never mind."
I am not Karl Rove. I want to see a vibrant democracy in this country. I would like to see the differences between my libertarian persuasion and neoconservatism contested. I can imagine an election where I weigh the answers to a number of questions when I make my choice. I can see two parties competing for my vote.
But the UN party is not one of them.
Found via AlphaPatriot.