Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 07:51 PM
Original message |
Will the proof of napalm be the thing to |
|
turn the UN against us? I have to believe the sane countries of the world will not put up with war crimes for much longer.
|
Ian David
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Why haven't they turned against us yet anyway? |
|
United Nations, if you are listening:
Embargo
Sanctions
|
Selatius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
Economic embargoes and sanctions are the jurisdiction of the UN Security Council. The US is a permanent member of that body, and it holds veto power. It would never pass.
|
htuttle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. A 'United for Peace' Resolution would get around a US and UK veto |
|
The US introduced the 'United for Peace' Resolution during the Korean War to get around Soviet vetos after the war started (IIRC).
Bascially, the General Assembly can vote to override a Security Council veto in matters of war and peace. I don't think it's ever been done, and they talked about doing it before the Iraq war but didn't, but the possibility is there.
|
Doctor_J
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. can't figure that one out |
|
we don't pay our dues, we bless torture, we bomb defenseless, innocent countries, kill women, children, and other non-combatants, and trash the planet. It's a matter of time.
|
Dark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Well, we are the most powerful country on the planet. By a long shot. |
|
Like it or not, the US is the most powerful nation. No country, by itself, could equal us. And it would take a semi-respectable nation to stand up and call for some action. BUT, that country would be reduced to ruins. We wouldn't even have to bomb them, just embargo their goods and coerce several other countries into joining as well.
|
Dark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I don't support the Iraq war, but I do not want the economic disentigration of the United States. After all, I voted democratic.
Do you have any idea what the embargo would do? All those poor people who I'm sure you claim to want to help, like the homeless, would bear the burden. They would suffer, not the rich, not the Bushes, not the republicans.
It would actually help the repubs. Americans would become even more isolationist, clamoring for revenge against the nations now sanctioning us.
The international community would have to deal with cutting off access to HALF the world's currency. This would throw the rest of the world into economic chaos.
Embargoing the US is a bad idea for everyone. Period.
|
Donna Zen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
according to some economists that economic disentigration is coming no matter what.
|
Dark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. Don't economists also say that Bush and Tax cuts are good for the economy? |
jimshoes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 07:56 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I've been thinking along |
|
the same lines. Only a matter of time till the rest of the world tells this mega arrogant administration to go cheney themselves. It will happen.
|
movonne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. It should happen and I can only hope it will happen and very, very |
|
soon, before we kill everyone in Iraq ..
|
bullimiami
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Nov-30-04 08:33 PM
Response to Original message |
10. no. torture, eh. cluster bombs, eh. |
|
depleted uranium, eh.
napalm, eh.
whatever.
signed, the spineless UN.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:03 PM
Response to Original message |