A couple of interesting items on AlterNet today. One is originally from the New Scientist magazine, about Iraqi attitudes toward the American use of depleted uranium shells in 1991. It goes on to say that regardless of whether it's true that the use of depleted uranium is causing Iraqi birth defects and cancer clusters, the perception is there that they do. This will make "winning hearts and minds" difficult for the US "liberation" force both during and after the coming war.

The other article I have some issues with. Supposedly the General Assembly of the UN can, when the Security Council is deadlocked, call an emergency session and pass a resolution based on the "uniting for peace" doctrine. This supposed resolution would call on the US to halt military action at once or declare the US in violation of the UN Charter. Now, this is a bit far-fetched. First, the GA has no compulsory power (whereas the SC at least has binding authority on paper). Second, the article uses the 1956 Suez crisis as an example of where the US pushed the UN GA to pass such a resolution calling for the Brits and the French withdraw from Egypt. Sorry, folks, it was not the UN that got them out of the Suez, it was the threat by the US and the Soviets to forcibly intervene against all sides of the Suez conflict that got the job done. Third, even if we accept the notion that the GA can indeed do something, the current GA session is unlikely to pass a resolution that goes this far in criticizing the US for one simple reason - geopolitics. The current president of the GA is the Czech ambassador. The Czech Republic is part of Donald Rumsfeld's "New Europe," those ex-Warsaw Pact, pro-US nations that are just aching to join NATO and the EU. The Czechs aren't stupid, their guy in the GA is not going to let any such resolution happen.

OK I think I'm going to bed now... but not before I post a link to Keep Fishin', Weezer's new video playing on MuchMusic USA. Hey, it features the Muppets. That's all ya gotta know. =)