LH: In your list of 'incursions' you include Israel on its 'Arab neighbours' in 1967 which I find incredible. Leaving out the bloviation of the Arab neighbors that they would push Israel into the sea, the mobilization of the Arab neigbors in cooperation with each other (Egypt then being called UAR, Syria, and Jordan) we have the presence of UN Mediation forces which were PULLED OUT at the last minute by U Thant. And, oh yes, the mining of territorial waters, in itself an act of war (by Egypt).

So you have inadvertently provided another example of UN making worse an existing situation by withdrawel (at the behest of Arab forces).

GUEST is correct to a point in blaming Clinton for US inaction in Rwanda, but it should be remembered that the US had had its nose badly bloodied (literally and figuratively) in Somalia late the preceding year. Clinton and by extension most Americans may have felt with some justice that there had to be more at stake or more support before US would commit more troops. In retrospect Clinton has said he should have done more and to his credit he went to Rwanda and apologized.

A very interesting movie that deals on the kinds of problems we are going in to in international peacekeeping is: "No Man's Land" which takes place in the recent Bosnian conflict, which the US did get involved with via the relatively efficient and non-corrupt NATO as opposed to UN auspices.

The UN MUST be supported over the long turn, because although horribly inefficient and riddled with idiocy and corruption, over time it will lead to better things. But expecting Kofi Annan and the present councils to achieve much is like expecting Mayor Curley to vote only once during a Boston election.