Fox News' Big Story asked: "What's the point of the U.N. if allies are all talk?"

Puddinhead George's "coalition of the willing"?

to avoid military conflict.

I dont have an issue with this story from FAUX.

To explain Russia's divergence with the United States on the Iran issue: Since the collpase of the Soviet Union fifteen years ago, the U.S. has aggressively sought to expand its influence in the region with former Soviet-bloc countries. The Rose Revolution in Georgia and the Orange Revolution in Ukraine are widely perceived in Russia (and with good reason) to have been aided by U.S. government support. Also to the consternation of Russia is the U.S.'s desire to see NATO expand into Georgia and Ukraine, effectively cordoning off these two countries from Kremlin influence.

In addition, the United States has been making serious diplomatic overtures to former Soviet states in Central Asia, including Uzbekistan (until its dictator kicked the U.S. out and relations soured after revelations of government massacres of innocent peaceful protestors), Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan, the latter two nations having recently been visited by Dick Cheney who used the opportunity to viciously criticize Russia and stoke new fears of a Cold War. Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are ruled by two brutal despots, of no concern to America due to their access to Caspian Sea oil reserves and willingness to partake in an oil pipeline that would ship Caspian oil to western ports without Russian influence.

Furthermore, along with the Rose and Orange Revolutions, the U.S. government actively sought to ensure the victory of a pro-U.S. regime in Belarus which was stalled. The country remains under strong Russian influence.

You see, the Cold War never ended for the U.S., but it did for Russia. And now Russia is courting the remaining few states in the region not under U.S. influence in an attempt to counterract America's growing presence in the aforementioned regions, hence the differing views on how to deal with Iranian nuclear enrichment.

Of course, on FOX News, it is just easier to say Russia is bad and blame the U.N. for lack of effectiveness than to actually understand and evaluate the underlying issues that keep Russia highly skeptical of U.S. behavior.

let's just gloss over all the OTHER U.N. Security Council and General Assembly resolutions regarding Israel's illegal occupation and expansion into the West Bank that the U.S. has outright rejected in the past and continues to do.

I'd rather see a lot of talk than a lot of bombs, especially from idiots in the current Administration who have no concept of "cause and effect" or "consequence of one's actions."

China has closer ties to North Korea than just about any other country, and has looked the other way when North Korea recaptures its own refuges that have fled into Chinese territory. I didn't realize that in order to be a U.S. ally, one had to go in lockstep with officail U.S. policy. NOT TRUE!!

Now cons are criticizing Russia and China for not being belligerent enough? Their Brylcreemed deity Ronald Reagan must be spinning in his grave!

Russia is NOT an ally of the U.S., which is quite clear if you have any understanding of the past fifteen years of U.S.-Russian relations, especially Washington-Kremlin relations under the Bush II regime.

China is viewed as a strategic adversary according to the DOD's latest Quadrennial Defense Review, which anticipates a future Sino-American Cold War in the next twenty years or so.

Banderas needs a refresher course on U.S. diplomatic relations abroad, but that would make her too knowledgable for any position at FOX News.

These wingnuts want the U.N. to function as a war room, where they're only there to decide who gets bombed next.

"It's almost kind of like, 'What's the point?'" This is too stupid, even for Fox.

The right (and many moderates) seem to have absolutely no clue of what the UN is and what they are suposed to do. The whole point of the UN is to promote peace and tolerance throughout the world and to try and find peaceful solutions to the world's problems.

Yet people constantly criticize the UN for not being a military/violence first organization. "Why doesn't the UN do more than talk?" Maybe because talking is the WHOLE POINT of the UN. If you don't like peaceful solutions and diplomacy then get the **** out of the organization.

Dont they know being an ally means do what you are told? The real criticism here is that the UN isnt a rubberstamp that allows itself to become an arm of US foriegn policy no matter how demented that policy is. We are becoming that guy that either gets his way on the basketball court or takes his ball and goes home.

...American imperialism. Alas, according to the Right, might makes right.

... when he cited their SANCTIONS (but without their continued approval) as the reason for going into Iraq.

It must be a kind of "love/hate" relationship ... love getting that nookie, but then it's time for a night out with the dogs of war. Don't call us, we'll call you.

nice when you don't spy on them. As Bush did during the run up to the Iraq war.

Many countries will come along and help in the reconstruction when Saddam is no longer in power.

Charter of the United Nations - Preamble

"We the Peoples of the United Nations Determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and "

to the extent of wanting to hold the resolution to give China a chance to talk to North Korea.

So why isn't Fox asking "What's the point of the Bush Co. if they are all talk?" Flipfloppers I say.

Someones attack dogs have gotten to far off the leash it appears. They'll have us at war before Bush, this time. Instead of just manipulating public opinion for the White House.

about using diplomatic means to solve the current issue with North Korea a couple days ago ? maybe these dodobirds at FOX ought to remove their earpieces and start engaging their brains before making stunningly stupid statements in public.

That's just thinkin' with words!

This whole GOP mob (and I'm including Fauxnews) just doesn't seem to grasp that the U.N. and every other nation in the world aren't our employees.The arrogance would be funny in a 2 year old, but for the ruling party of THE superpower, just mind-numbing.

"..why is it that every time we try to use the U.N., China, Russia don't necessarily participate."

"Use" ? Do they have the UN mixed up with AAA?

I think I felt some similar frustrations when I was about 17.

"Why is it that every time i try to use that girl, she doesn't participate? "

I eventually figured out whose problem it was, and occasionally got a girl to "participate".

If you listen to righty radio, the attitude towards the UN is hilarious. Even when thry're not citing massive corruption(mostly imagined) it's fascinating to hear the people who think GW is a great leader trying to understand real approaches to complex issues.

Does Fox News have more anchors with cleavage than any other network? Murdoch knows that sex sells. Substance? Facts?! These are but small steps to overcome in his quest for world media domination!

I would really like to see an analysis done on this. And I'm just the man to do it. Just kidding. But seriously..