security council

(on a personal note - I wasn't able to blog yesterday because I decided to take the plunge and move to Vista. I will post about that experience on my tech blog later for those interested).

Following yesterday's news that the State Department decided to give Blackwater immunity, today we find out a new battle is brewing between the Iraqi government and our's over immunity for all contractors:

The Iraqi government on Tuesday approved draft legislation lifting immunity for foreign private security companies, sending the measure to parliament, a spokesman said.

The question of immunity has been one of the most serious dispute between the U.S. and the Iraqi government since a Sept. 16 shooting involving Blackwater USA guards that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead.

The government's decision followed reports that the State Department has promised Blackwater bodyguards immunity from prosecution in its investigation of last month's shooting.

So if this legislation ends up passing in Iraq, what will we do? Will we honor the sovereignty of Iraq and allow it (I mean real sovereignty - not some Bush definition)? If we don't, then the interesting question will be where it goes from there. The U.N. is already looking into the issue, so there is a chance this could end up being argued at the Hague. Of course any ruling against the U.S., or any action taken against us will meet a veto in the Security Council. Remember - this is how the Bush regime considers democracy to work; do what I want and I will say you got democracy.

This is the mess in Iraq that the Democrats, especially Jack Murtha, have been warning about:

Iraq will ask the United Nations to end immunity from local law for U.S. troops, the government said on Monday, as the U.S. military named five soldiers charged in a rape-murder case that has outraged Iraqis.

In an interview a week after Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki demanded a review of foreign troops' immunity, Human Rights Minister Wigdan Michael said work on it was now under way and a request could be ready by next month to go to the U.N. Security Council, under whose mandate U.S.-led forces operate in Iraq.

"We're very serious about this," she said, adding a lack of enforcement of U.S. military law in the past had encouraged soldiers to commit crimes against Iraqi civilians.

"We formed a committee last week to prepare reports and put it before the cabinet in three weeks. After that, Maliki will present it to the Security Council. We will ask them to lift the immunity," Michael said.

I am sure the White House and pundit spin is already in full gear to try and downplay this as an "act of appeasement by the new government for their people", or some other typical bullshit. The fact lies in this article with this line: "adding a lack of enforcement of U.S. military law in the past had encouraged soldiers to commit crimes against Iraqi civilians. ".

Well things are really heating up with Iran. You can tell that Bush's approval ratings are in the crapper and they really need something else to divide this country. What a better way to do this then to get Cheney out there opening his mouth (from the WAPO)

Though Lavrov said it was too early to discuss U.N. sanctions against Iran, Vice President Cheney had already issued a blunt threat that Iran will face "meaningful consequences" if it fails to cooperate with international efforts to curb its nuclear program.

OK. Now remember last summer when Cheney was running his mouth about Kim Jong-Il? He said he was the worse leader in the world and this of course upset the North Korean leader and he even broke off talks on the nuclear stand off between us and them. Well Cheney's motor mouth is doing it again (from the AP).

Iran threatened the United States with "harm and pain" Wednesday for its role in hauling Tehran before the U.N. Security Council over its nuclear program.

What does Cheney not get about the word diplomacy? I guess he is just following the normal suit for this entire administration. When numerous other countries disagreed with us on Iraq then we acted like a pack of spoiled brats and even said "whaaa we won't call them French Fries anymore".

It has become obvious how this administration operates. Bush is the spoiled brat that has to always get what he wants. Cheney is the big bully that helps George out so when George needs something its Cheney to the rescue. What will it take to get these two to go on a hunting trip together?

It will be interesting to see how the administration tries to downplay this
report:

United Nations inquiry has called for the immediate closure of America's
Guantanamo Bay detention centre and the prosecution of officers and
politicians "up to the highest level" who are accused of torturing
detainees.

The UN Human Rights Commission report, due to be published this week,
concludes that Washington should put the 520 detainees on trial or release
them.

The report wants the Bush administration to ensure that all allegations
of torture are investigated by US criminal courts, and that "all
perpetrators up to the highest level of military and political command are
brought to justice".

It does not specify who it means by "political command" but logically
this would include President George W Bush.

Article continues

here

The timing of this report is really the interesting part here. Now that we
are facing problems with Iran and even referring them to the security council,
we have to make a choice of how to view the UN. If we are willing to tell Iran
that they must conform to the power of the Security Council then the United
States must also be willing to conform to the power of the U.N. and take this
report seriously. That of course will most likely not be the case. Instead, the
US will go by its usual "practice what I preach, not what I do" mentality and
prove to the world we don't answer to no one. I am just wondering how long
before we start getting sanctions against us.

An agreement has been reached in the six party talks with
North Korea. It still is lying short of a non-proliferation agreement but is
considered a major stepping stone in progress.

North Korea says they will abandon their weapons program
but maintains the right to nuclear energy.

The part that is not leaving me wondering is what cost this
has to us. North Korea was demanding concessions in the form of economic and
others. No mention in any articles if those concessions have been met or what
they will cost our already financially strapped nation.

This milestone will hopefully send a message to Washington
that talks can work and should be totally exhausted before a referral to the
Security Council. Hopefully it will make them rethink actions on Iran.

While some are considering this a triumph for George Bush,
it should be more so looked at as damage control. It was George Bush’s “axis of
evil” speech that got us into this mess, when he clumped Iraq, Iran and North
Korea into one group as terrorists. Now we got to see how much those words
actually cost the citizens of this country.