Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: philman_36
Duck, the Black helicopters are flying low tonight.

None of those treaties are valid if they contravene the US Constitution.

You are hyperventilating over PR and diplomatic Blather.
International Law comes out of the barrel of a gun. Right now that makes The President of the United States, in consultation with Congress, the Supreme Panjamdrum and Ultimate Arbiter.
Nothing else is real. Nothing else counts.

So9

27 posted on 02/04/2003 11:34:36 PM PST by Servant of the Nine (We are the Hegemon. We can do anything we damned well please.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Servant of the Nine
Duck, the Black helicopters are flying low tonight.
Aren't you the trite one.
None of those treaties are valid if they contravene the US Constitution.
Yeah, try telling that to the ones who support that disarmament crap and other such things. They'll tell you that those treaties do. Someone else who thinks they do...

The Vienna Convention is in force for 81 nation-states, not including the United States. The reason it is not in force for the United States is that a stalemate exists between Congress and the Executive Branch over the allocation of authority between the two branches to enter into and terminate international agreements (treaties in the international sense) on behalf of the United States. The stalemate would not exist if such agreements were not regarded as binding on the United States internationally. It is precisely because they are regarded as binding that so much is at stake between the two branches of government.
The United States government has frequently demonstrated that it regards treaties (including treaties for U.S. constitutional purposes as well as other international agreements) as binding instruments under international law. For example, when France breached the 1946 Air Service Agreement between itself and the United States, our government asserted a breach of an international obligation and applied counter-measures to induce France to rectify its breach. The U.S. counter-measures were upheld by an international arbitral tribunal. 54 Int'l Law Reports 304 (Award of Dec.9, 1979).

Snip...Treaties, including the United Nations Charter, are binding instruments under international law, subject to limited grounds much like those in domestic contract law for invalidating or terminating them.
You are hyperventilating over PR and diplomatic Blather.
No, I'm not hyperventilating over anything. That's twice now in one week that I've been accused of hyperventilating. Is someone conferencing?
International Law comes out of the barrel of a gun.
Now you seem to be contradicting yourself. First it's PR and diplomatic Blather and then it's the barrel of a gun. The gun is aimed at US!
Right now that makes The President of the United States, in consultation with Congress, the Supreme Panjamdrum and Ultimate Arbiter.
Is that similar to the "Grand High Poohbah? The previous snip ought to give some insight as to how well they're working together.
Nothing else is real. Nothing else counts.
You are suffering from delusions. If nothing else counts and nothing else is real why is there the pacification of the liberals that this very article talks about? Go to the UN and get permission and that is exactly what happened. Seems very real and counting to me.
The UN is real and the UN matters. Current history should tell you that! Those treaties are real and they will be enforced at some point in time by that gun barrel you mentioned earlier. You just watch, trite boy. Study hard.
29 posted on 02/05/2003 12:02:26 AM PST by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Servant of the Nine
Read this article and tell me who you should be bitching at!
A clue...it isn't me! I'm glad Bush has done what he's done.
Editors Criticize U.S. Stance at U.N. Conference on Arms Trade
Baltimore Sun, July 12, 2001: "Bush administration grandstands on the wrong side at U.N." "The Bush administration's posture is the most egregious of its isolationist gestures in international affairs, some of which it later clarified into reasonable positions. The U.S. delegation can yet find that its scruples about legitimate possession of personal weapons are not compromised. The goal should be to restrain the trade in weapons that are most sought by terrorists, child armies and narco-trafficking gangsters. Surely, the President cannot object to that."

Minneapolis Star Tribune, July 13, 2001: "Stop the world's gun runners" "It's pretty hard to see a downside to slowing the flow of grenade launchers and AK-47s to the world's civil wars. Yet somehow Bush has managed. This must be because he's looking through NRA glasses, which can make almost anything look like a threat to American gun owners."

St. Louis Post-Dispatch, July 16,2001: "Exporting Bloodshed" "As it did in rejecting the Kyoto protocol on global warming, the Antiballistic Missile Treaty and the formation of a permanent International Criminal Court for war crimes at The Hague, the Bush administration again has displayed arrogant apathy toward the rest of the world's problems and a refusal to take a more productive role in resolving them."
A bunch more in there. Take your fight to the right place, trite boy!

31 posted on 02/05/2003 12:12:25 AM PST by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson