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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (215539)	1/7/2002 4:31:13 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

John Doggett! Long time, no see....Well, I cannot see the European Union, Russia, China, Israel, or several other countries allowing the UN to supercede existing institutions, much less the United States. Without the United States and Europe, the UN pretty much cannot afford to pursue its wilder ambitions or to field a credible army. Nor do I think that NATO is going to give up its independence to the UN,and, in any case, realistically, the United States, the UK, and Canada are the backbone of the organization, and nothing will happen over their vetoes. I think remaining in NATO is still in our interest, for the time being. We might, though, consider getting out of the UN once and for all, and asking it to move to Geneva.......

To: gao seng who wrote (215539)	1/7/2002 4:32:20 PM
From: Bob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

This new global institution brings implications too horrible to exaggerate. It is authorized to prosecute "crimes against humanity," which it defines. The court is not subject to veto by any other authority and is unaccountable to any nation or authority. At U.N. meetings, the United States is regularly accused of such "crimes against humanity," as allowing the death penalty, and civilian gun ownership, and allowing citizens to drive gas-guzzling, carbon-spewing SUVs.