I'm referring to the inconsistency. The implication of what you are saying is: "The UN only intervenes when it suits the US". To me that makes me think LESS of the UN sanctions, not more.
On consistency: I don't think UN, as a group of nations with conflicting goals, tries to behave in a consistent way, although people are free to blame it for its inconsistency.
It is isn't it? Otherwise it isn't a union...
> That cannot explain veto power of five permanent members of UN security council, which no other country has.
That's completely true... turns out there are more problems with the UN than just being a veil for US aggression... colour me surprised.