The basic question is did the members who were benefiting from the oil for food scandal support Saddam Hussein and oppose the invasion?

I believe so and if so, Kofi Annan, who was overseeing the oil for food program, was negligent and possibly benefiting himself.

In light of the fact of the massacres in Bosnia, Rwanda and the current one in Sudan, he is totally derelict in his duty.

This renders the whole of the UN corrupt, ineffective and irrelevant. I don't think the UN can be fixed. The UN needs to be replaced and the US needs to quit pumping money into the UN because it is only benefiting the enemies of democracy.

The Scottsman
Sat 20 Nov 2004
UN must reform if it is to fulfil its purpose after past failures
THE United Nations was founded in 1945 to "save succeeding generations from the scourge of war". It has failed. Recognising that fact is the precursor to putting it right. To take only the most recent example, in Darfur, in western Sudan, some 300,000 people have died over the last 20 months as a result of genocide and mass starvation at the hands of the Khartoum regime. The UN has proved powerless to stop this massacre.

The organisation's track record over the past decade has been equally lamentable. It failed to make Saddam Hussein obey repeated Security Council resolutions, yet refused Britain and the United States formal permission to bring Saddam to heel. It did not act over the genocidal conflict in Bosnia, which was only ended with unilateral action by NATO. And UN troops stood by helplessly while 800,000 Hutus were massacred in Rwanda.

What can be done to make the UN more effective? Or should it be scrapped? These questions are being debated inside the UN.

M