Why do Americans have an irrational fear of international organizations?

[Jon Miller]

basically I don't think the world is ready for a one-world government

and so will resist any efforts to make it so

Jon Miller
(sense all it really is is posturing and certain countries trying to get more power for themselves through diplomatic means)

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
the point is that that is still losing sovereignty

it is taking something that has only been the responsibility of the US and theoretically allowing another power to be above it

Jon Miller

So I take you would agree with David Floyd then that the Nuremburg Trials had no legitimacy?

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If you're going to use rejecting Kyoto not earning the ire of anyone, I call BS.

Well originally when we refused to ratify Kyoto it wasn't a big deal. It was when Bush 'unsigned' us from Kyoto that it became a big hubbub.

Totally. Clinton wouldn't have ratified but he didn't give a big FU to the world whilst not ratifying.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Well then why do you back losing soveriegnty of your state to the federal government? What about losing soveriegnty of your county to the state? Or your town to the county? I don't trust the federal government or the state to look out for my best interest... so why should I give them more soveriegnty? Same argument, no?

Because I consider myself an American first and a Virginian second.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

the point is that that is still losing sovereignty

Well then why do you back losing soveriegnty of your state to the federal government? What about losing soveriegnty of your county to the state? Or your town to the county? I don't trust the federal government or the state to look out for my best interest... so why should I give them more soveriegnty? Same argument, no?

Yes and no. I don't trust the federal government to represent me as well as state, or county government. However I know I'm at least represented at the federal level in this country.

I have no representation at the UN or an ICC. I don't vote for Secretary General nor do I vote for judges of the ICC (or vote for people who appoint ICC judges). They are undemocratic institutions. Why should a democratic country give up rights to an undemocratic institution?

[Imran Siddiqui]

well, they already hvae sovereignty

So? If they got soveriegnty they get a free pass from you?

and let's face it, there are some things that we in the US think differently about than our western neighbors (same is true of african/asian/south american countries, but they are weaker than us, and less able to resist)

And there are some (A LOT, actually) things that the South thinks differently than the Northeast!

[Imran Siddiqui]

I have no representation at the UN or an ICC. I don't vote for Secretary General nor do I vote for judges of the ICC (or vote for people who appoint ICC judges).

There was the comment about the Nuremburg trials, but yes you are represented. The federal government appoints a representative to the UN, who is under orders by the administration to vote a certain way. The ICC is an agency of the UN.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MikeH

Totally. Clinton wouldn't have ratified but he didn't give a big FU to the world whilst not ratifying.

The rest of you should have been a bit smarter. Kyoto is a horrible deal that won't ever amount to any world wide net CO2 reductions. Energy intesive industries will just move from capped countries (1st world) to uncapped countries (3rd world) where they will have even fewer enviromental laws.

If we are to gut our heavy industry I want to at least make sure it results in meaningful world wide reductions. Kyoto doesn't do that.

[Az]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Since he is a commie (well a socialist at least), I wonder why he would. Our federal government and states aren't really socialism friendly in their policies.

Yes, but this isn't necessarily connected. The fact that the government is capitalist, doesn't mean I wouldn't trust my life with it's firemen, and paramedics, for example.

[MalevolentLight]

Ironic that you ask this question as we find more and more scandal in the UN and the UN continues to try to cover it up. Priceless.

[laurentius]

There are hundreds of americans who should be prosecuted in the Hague. Personnel famous from Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, Falluja etc.

Justice wont be done of course, because both the American government and its people feel that the laws dont apply to them.

[MalevolentLight]

It's good that you feel outrage for putting underwear on some guy's head, but I don't see you screaming out in rage as the muslim monkeys lop off heads. Double standards rule.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The rest of you should have been a bit smarter. Kyoto is a horrible deal that won't ever amount to any world wide net CO2 reductions. Energy intesive industries will just move from capped countries (1st world) to uncapped countries (3rd world) where they will have even fewer enviromental laws.

Did you miss the point entirely? Clinton didn't have to get it ratified, just not give a middle finger to the rest of the world by 'unsigning' it.

[MikeH]

Well there is that.

And also the US doesn't need the ICC because in US worldview they can just take people from wherever they find them and hold them indefinitely just outside the US with no charges or proper trial.

[MikeH]

So - Americans are worried about international organisations because they are always breaking international law and don't want to be punished for it.

CASE CLOSED!