Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: coug who wrote (35005)	10/22/2001 8:44:46 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 82486

About having international law for a global force to enforce.. Supposedly we do now in some things.. various treaties... And true, rich countries would have to give more in resources and "world power" sort of speak,, BUT not within their borders in the way of our liberties... If the US government violated a treaty would the world police force come after it? If it wanted to could it? Any force that could give the US pause would certainly be able to dominate many other countries. I just don't think the scheme works without a fully functional world government. It could be a loose confederation rather then a centralized government but it would still be a government. As far as international law goes it doesn't cover to much and is basically treaties. The countries as still soverign they just agree to different things. But what about the countries who don't sign the treaties. Could North Korea or Afghanistan be immune this police force because they didn't sign some relevant treaty? Tim