U.N. Peacekeepers? What a LOUSY Idea!

We're hearing a lot these days about how we should be looking to the U.N. to send Peacekeepers to the Israel - Lebanon border. Anyone with any brains, or even just a modicum of historical perspective, realizes just what a lousy -- and worthless -- idea that would be.

The New York Sun (not the NYTimes (darling of terrorists everywhere)) has a good editorial on why we should say "No thanks" to more U.N. "help".

Rwanda and Srebrenica are the two most notorious recent [U.N. peacekeepiing] failures. Mr. Annan headed the United Nations peacekeeping department during both massacres. In Rwanda blue helmets exited as 800,000 Tutsis were massacred. Despite having advance warning of the genocide, U.N. peacekeepers were told by Mr. Annan's department to remain "impartial." At Srebrenica the U.N. peacekeepers did nothing as Bosnian Serbs murdered 8,000 Muslims — in the U.N.'s "safe haven."

From Sierra Leone, where U.N. peacekeepers were taken hostage, to the Congo, where the peacekeepers traded food for sex with girls as young as 13, the term "U.N. peacekeepers" sends shudders down the spines of the persons they were sent to "protect." For Americans, "U.N. peacekeeping" is synonymous with Somalia. Who can forget the image of the bodies of American soldiers being dragged through the streets?

Read the entire editorial here.