A clip from
www.un.org :
"THE UNITED NATIONS is a unique international organization of 191 sovereign States, representing virtually every country in the world.* It was founded after the Second World War to maintain international peace and security, develop friendly relations among nations and promote social progress, better living standards and human rights. "
found here
The reason I bring this up, is because the UN has a mandate limited to the PROMOTION of "social progress, better living standards and human rights", which clearly (to me?) excludes any action that would topple a government.
As such, I maintain that by its very nature, the UN cannot sanction an action that would topple Saddam. In that view, it is perfectly understandable that a top member of its security council would state publicly that a proposal to such an action would be vetoed.
So to which extent would the UN apply, and/or authorize the use of a military force, I ask you?:shrug: