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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (41619)	11/21/2005 4:48:44 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

I think it is an ideal to strive for as a formal INTERNATIONAL policy. Who actually ENFORCES your unternational policy? The corrupt thieves at the UN? It may be "good" even without formal agreement and shared responsibility--but it is fighting a forest fire from the middle and tossing gasoline about. Eh? Had Britain and France marched into the Rhineland when Hitker sent in his troops there (and as they had a right to do under the Versailles Treaty), would they be "fighting a forest fire from the middle and tossing gasoline about"? Ideally it should be a formalized response based on new legal agreements of International Law and Enforcement. The majority of the UN memebers are effectively dictatorships. I say effectively because numerous of them claim to be democracies, but the same man or the same party wins all the national elections. (Note Mexico, your southern neighbor, skipping one. THe PRI won every Presidential election until Fox from the 1920 revolution against Diaz on.) How likely are they to vote for a policy that may get them invaded?