Quigley gets most of the picture correct. Though he ties UN inaction to US influences, he still seems to suggest the UN could act anyway despite the U.S. Realistic advocacy should also advocate "change" in the US lockstep with right wing reactionary forces in Israel.

Opinion piecem making good case for UN sanctions (that the US would be sure to block anyway).

It provides a sound rational for doing what the article presents the "right and humane thing to do"

Good article, but does not go far enough. The state of Israel is not in accord with the UN charter and should be abolished.

Mr. Quigley say's what everyone already knows, the United States could have stopped this massacre and did nothing but watch Israel slaughter Women and Children. While Israel may have killed a few Hamas leader's, and destroyed some weapon's and tunnel's, they accomplished NOTHING!

The US reluctance to work constructively with the UN renders any actions of the world organization meaningless. On the other hand Israel cant attempt any major military action without US material support. The article correctly concludes that Israel will act only with US approval and rightly suggests that any action should be take within the authority of the United Nations.

He dares to tell the truth and backs his assertions up with facts.

No. This piece is replete with inaccuracies, outright untruths, and ommissions. See my cooments, which I shared with Mr. Quigley, but to which he never responded.