Joe Whitten Blog : Theology, Rants, Photography, Politics, Denver, Colorado

How often does the president of the United States along with the leaders of other countries and the United Nations condemn the actions of other countries? The most recent (as of 7:28 Mountain Time, 5/25/2009) is the condemnation of North Korea’s second nuclear test. Does verbally condemning the actions of a regime such as the one in North Korea under the control of a man who apparently has very little intelligence, and the attitude of a child trying to get his way though staging tantrums, really accomplish anything?

Kim Jong-il inherited the rule of North Korea from his father. He has never really accomplished anything noteworthy on his own his entire life. He seems to think of himself as a god. Is a public, verbal condemnation of a narcissistic individual like this really likely to have any effect on his actions? Maybe his next tantrum will be worse because he did not get his way this time, but certainly the condemnation will have no positive effect.

The latest condemnation is not the first one the world has issued against Kim Jong-il, and the previous condemnations resulted in no positive change either. Just last month, April 5, North Korea launched an intercontinental rocket. The U.S. had threatened to shoot it down but instead took no action at all. Wow, Kim Jong-il must really be growing frightened by all of this condemnation. North Korea conducted its first nuclear test at the end of 2006 drawing international condemnation. Judging by the events since then, especially those of the past couple of months, it seems safe to say that condemnations have no effect on North Korea.

Who else has the U.S, other countries, and the United Nations condemned over the past couple of decades?

18 September 2001 – United Nations issues condemnation for the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Can someone explain what purpose that served?

In 2005, the United States and others publicly condemned Mahmud Ahmadinejad for stating that Israel should be wiped off the map and that the Holocaust is a myth.

During Jimmy Carter’s term as president he issued several condemnations against Iran and its leadership. It would take an entire book to explore that issue, but it’s safe to say that his condemnations served no good purpose.

The United States is not alone in it zeal to publicly condemn the actions of other countries. Iran has demanded (December, 2006) that the United Nations condemn Israel’s nuclear program. (Israel has never officially declared that it has a nuclear program.) Iran probably did this to provide itself with an excuse for its own nuclear program when the United Nations failed to issue the condemnation.

This list is nowhere near complete. The point of this post is simply to ask the question: “What is the purpose in publicly condemning something that you are not going to do anything about?” Constantly mouthing off and then not backing up the condemnation serves to strengthen your enemy’s resolve and make you look like a wimp. Well, the current president doesn’t look like he has ever curled a barbell in his life; he probably has the skinniest arms of any president in our history, so I guess it figures that he would enjoy acting tough, knowing that he will never have to tell any one of these people to their face (without his bodyguards) that he thinks their behavior is not satisfactory.

To the president, the United Nations and everyone else in a high position: Stop the Lip Service! No more condemnations without action to back it up. If you are not serious then just keep your mouth shut.