Can the change in the US leadership will make any change to its foreign policy!!

The UN didn't pass any resolutions barring the US from being in Iraq. In fact there were 16 resolutions that Iraq was violating that meant the US should go into Iraq. The UN is only as strong as the will of the US.

It is always possible that a change in leadership will cause a change in policy. It happened when Bush entered the Whitehouse following Clinton and started this who fiasco. It is always possible that a new President, and now the new Democrat controlled Congress, can swing American foreign policy back on the right path. There are also a lot of domestic concerns that factor into US elections that will also bring social and economic issues back to center away from the conservative right that currently controls US politics completely until the new Congress is sworn in in January.

The new leadership will create minor changes, but we can not expect to see the sweeping changes that the politicians promised during the campaigns. First and formost, leaving occupied countries means that we will take all forces out of areas in which we currently have troops including Germany, S. Korea, Japan, England, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, Columbia, Mexico, Cananda, Vietnam, Somalia, The entire Cape Horn region in Africa.. The list goes on and on. We can not resonably expect to pack right up and leave. That would be negligent on our part and skirting our responsibility as a leader in the world. We can not blame this entirely on Bush either. A brief glance in history shows that all presidents send our troops into battle with long lasting implications. The UN as a whole is inherently flawed and the only solution is to disband the organization as it currently sits and reorganize and restructure it to form a legitimate organization.