WASHINGTON -- The United Nations is still alive -- but only barely.

Thanks to President George W. Bush's decision to ignore the U.N. and go it alone in Iraq, the world body suffered a huge loss of political credibility.

The presidential snub raises the threat that the United States will, for the second time, destroy an international organization designed to protect world peace.

The first occurred in the aftermath of World War I when the League of Nations foundered and died after the U.S. Senate refused to ratify membership. The league was the world's first major attempt at collective security in the aftermath of that devastating conflict.

President Woodrow Wilson toured the country, pleading in vain for support for Senate ratification.

This time around, it is the White House that has weakened the U.N. and defied the authority of the Security Council when it did not agree with our contention that Iraq posed an "imminent threat" to the United States because of its weapons of mass destruction.

We're still looking for those weapons.

Before the U.S. invasion, U.N. inspectors in Iraq had turned up nothing, a finding that the Bush administration simply could not accept because it didn't fit into the president's pro-war agenda.

Despite the fact that our military forces have occupied Iraq for almost a month, U.S. hunters have also come up empty handed.

Now the United States is apparently ready to throw in the towel. The Washington Post reported that the American arms inspectors were getting ready to leave Iraq in frustration.

Hans Blix, the chief U.N. arms inspector, could say "I told you so." Secretary of State Colin Powell might have to retract some of the detailed bill of particulars on Saddam Hussein's arsenal that he laid out before the U.N. Security Council last Feb. 5, trying to make the case that Iraq was an imminent threat.

Powell could give that lame Washington explanation that "mistakes were made."

Powell told the U.N. that Hussein had an estimated 25,000 liters of anthrax; 100 to 500 tons of chemical weapons agent, enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets along with four tons of the deadly nerve agent VX. Gosh, you'd think U.S. troops would have found some of that by now.

When he announced on March 19 that he ordered the bombing of Iraq, Bush explained that he took the step "to defend the world from grave danger." We await the evidence that would justify such a claim.

American officials have a credibility problem and some accounting to do to the public. Or does anyone care? Does the truth matter? Does a little bit of White House deception hurt? After all, the brutal dictator Saddam Hussein has been deposed and his evidence of his crimes against his own people is steadily being unearthed.

Should Americans let the historians handle this one or beat them to the punch as we did during the Vietnam war? Back then, an outraged citizenry made two presidents -- Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon -- pay for their costly decisions.

Like Dickens' Mr. Micawber, Bush and his top military and diplomatic advisers are still hoping that something will turn up to bolster their credibility.

Three suspicious mobile trailers that could have been used as laboratories for biological weapons are being inspected. The relevance of these trailers isn't immediately obvious, given the fact that everyone agrees that Saddam had once produced bacteriological and chemical weapons.

The question is, as it was before the U.S. attack: Does Iraq now possess weapons of mass destruction?

As U.S. forces adjust to the awkward role of an occupying power, we struggle back to the United Nations to seek help from other member nations.

We want the world body to end sanctions against Iraq, an about-face from our previous steadfast opposition against any move to end the economic embargo. Now it suits our purpose to lift the sanctions, so we seek U.N. approval.

We also are now asking the U.N. to help with some aspects of the reconstruction of Iraq. How ironic. We went to war without U.N. support but now come back for help in getting Iraq back on its feet.

It's too bad that the president's father, former President George H.W. Bush -- who once served as the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. -- did not convince his son of the importance of collective security.

There are those in the administration who obviously feel that we can call all the shots because of our military superiority and we don't need to abide by our international commitments.

Those shortsighted officials should recall what President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in his fourth inaugural address on Jan. 20, 1945, with the globe still ablaze with World War II.

"We have learned that we cannot live alone (and be) at peace; that our own well being is dependent on the well being of other nations far away," Roosevelt said. "We have learned that we must live as men, and not as ostriches, nor as dogs in the manger. We have learned to be citizens of the world, members of the human community."

Those were wise words.

(Helen Thomas can be reached at the e-mail address helent@hearstdc.com).