The full text of the proposed UN Resolution tabled today by the US, UK, and Spain can be found here. Sorry peacemongers, time to put up or shut up:

Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999 and 1441 (2002) of 8 November 2002, and all the relevant statements of its president,

Yeah, the key term is “relevant statements”, and that is exactly what is being put on trial here – the relevancy of the United Nations. Either Saddam is in compliance with the resolutions of the United Nations or he is not. Let’s see how many nations are willing to say otherwise.

By the way – and this deserves mention – but I wish our American diplomats could make just half of the argument that UK Foreign Minister Jack Straw made for action today. As I’ve said before, this “coalition of the willing” is a coalition of British leadership and American strength:

“Nobody, not one minister before this council… has said that Iraq is now fully, actively and immediately in compliance with [UN resolution] 1441.

“The progress that has been reported represents only the tip of a huge iceberg of unfinished business.

“The only way we are going to achieve the disarmament of a rogue regime… is by backing our diplomacy with a credible threat of force.

“We are tabling [an amendment] which will specify a further period beyond the adoption of a resolution for Iraq to take the final opportunity to disarm and to bring themselves into compliance.”

Absolutely.