Probably not. I would have loved to see a gaggle of toques shuffling out of the courthouse.

Syncro

At some point one has to pull back and look at what has happened in plain language:

Post Desert Storm the UN recognized that Sadaam Hussein was a deadly threat to certain populations within Iraq and instituted sanctions and no-fly zones.

When the UN discovered, and reported, that the sanctions were having a deadly impact on the population (unequally born by the zero-to-five-year-old age group), the Oil-for-Food mechanism was put in place.

UN officials abused this system for personal profit and made the sanctions uneffective by enriching Sadaam Hussein. The sanctions remained in effect, their only apparent impact being to put pressure on the weakest members of Iraqi society. (This is ironic in that the UN Charter states that its reason-for-being is to protect the weak.)

Concurrently, UN weapons inspectors were unable to track Sadaam’s weapons stores. While the last-minute reports indicated that they were unable to find any significant weapons of mass distruction. It ought to be noted that this is entirely different from ensuring that he had none.

It also should be noted that at this point, were Sadaam to account for his weapons, the kick-backs from oil-for-food would stop. It might have been that the whole arrangement worked well for him right up until the US invaded.

The point is that through a mixture of good intentions, selfish motives and bad management, the UN’s involvement was instrumental in paving the road to war.

It is also apparent that Sadaam was managing and manipulating the diplomatic measures with deadly effect for a significant number of innocents.

The UN scolds Bush and emerges, good name intact. -What to do next?