sovereignty and the powerful
Mars Man said:
Every national government, every national, ethnic group of peoples should be willing to relinquish a fair share of self-sovergnty to the UN, in order to give it the strength to, for example, be able to stop those who wish to invade against international laws--like some kind of bushwacker. I wish number 3), above, were truer.
Most countries do, or would relinquish some sovereignty. Or perhaps
they have little choice when it comes to the powerful that wish to enforce
whatever they wish to enforce. It is out United States that so far has refused to adhere to the UN or international law in general. The political elites in the US do not wish to play fair when it comes to international politics. This is either wing of the ruling republi-crat party for sure. It seems almost as if Bush were "taking one for the ruling class", in that so many US citizens are blinded by their hate for Bush and his foreign policy that they refuse to see this. It is well documented. William Blum, for one, whose site
I just happened to have open right now
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm
is one source that starts to get this information to us. Of course,
with all the propaganda, i.e. political spin, put out by US governments
it is quite understandable that we have not always been aware of this
stuff. Also, though I havn't gotten to it yet, I did hear Norman Solomon
on WIPublic Radio talking about his new book. "War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death"
http://www.coldtype.net/war.html He chronicals how the drumbeat
for US intervention in other people's countries is a regular pattern.
As with above and others documenting this stuff, the US, dare I say,
"oligarchy", fears giving up any sovereignty because they know
they have violated international law repeatedly, either of 2 main US parties.
Oh, did I mention they killed millions via their policies? Civilians mostly.
Gosh, countries are dumb, and so are the legal institutions of privalage -
the corporations - that the "oligarchy" hides behind & whose intere$t
the foreign policy is done for. It is $ and the privalege that protects
that $ that they kill and subvert international as well as domestic law for
http://www.poclad.org/images/illustrations/black_quote.jpg
So how do we get either 1) or 3) that Maciamo laid out for us into effect?
2) ? Arundhati Roy points out that to take on the US empire is a near
impossiblity militarily.
What Maciamo laid out is a generic for winners of wars.
Specifically in the world today the US is the powerful and most likely
winner of wars, because - it is most likely to wage wars.
So how do we get to #1 or #3 in the US?