When W suggest that to the UN General Assembly that
This great institution must work for great purposes -- to free people from tyranny and violence, hunger and disease, illiteracy and ignorance, and poverty and despair. Every member of the United Nations must join in this mission of liberation.two things strike me: 1) Is this enough to fix what ails the globe? And 2) Isn't this what the UN technically is already supposed to be doing?
Really, if freedom is the salve that cures situations such as Iraq, how long should we give it? Is our model for spreading freedom the right model?
If "spreading freedom" is your aim, might there be another, more effective way to do it than raining death upon a nation in the name of said freedom?