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.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (2917)	4/9/1999 12:25:00 AM
From: George Papadopoulos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17770

A letter written to a British paper: Thursday April 8, 1999 The Guardian (Letters) guardian.co.uk US foreign policy can be defined as follows: 'Kiss my arse or I'll kick your head in.' Milosevic refused to kiss America's arse so Clinton is kicking in the head of the Serbian people (not Milosevic himself) with catastrophic consequences for the Kosovans. Nato's action is ill thought out, ill considered, misjudged, miscalculated, disastrous. It is also totally illegal and probably represents the last nail in the coffin of the UN. The justification for the action - 'humanitarian considerations' - is clearly a very bad joke. It also demonstrates a profound hypocrisy on the part of the US and UK. Sanctions on Iraq - led by those countries - have killed nearly one million Iraqi children. That's genocide for you - in no uncertain terms. Milosevic is undoubtedly ruthless and savage. So is Clinton. Clinton continues the vicious Reagan/Bush tradition with no trouble at all. But he combines that tradition with a shy grin and a beguiling southern drawl. He can really be so sweet on television. Blair is the one who kisses Clinton's arse fervently and dreams that he is Mrs Thatcher. The level of intelligence employed in this whole enterprise is pathetic if not infantile. The US is now a highly dangerous force, totally out of control. Harold Pinter, London

To: D. Long who wrote (2917)	4/9/1999 12:46:00 AM
From: nihil	Respond to of 17770

All Treaties are mandatory on some and irrelevant to others. The "high contracting parties" ordinarily bind themselves on penalties to abide by their agreements. There are few (none I know of) treaties that can be unilaterally abrogated instantaneously. Ordinary treaties require a set of warnings before they cease to be operative. There are many treaties that allow foreigners to violate American domestic law. Thus a Japanese corporation (not a US subsidiary of it) can preferentially hire Japanese men and discriminate against anyone else including women un the US-Japan Commercial Treaty. These agreements are in general inviolable without termination of the agreement which takes time. American courts will enforce the foreigners' rights until the treaty is denounced and ceases to be operative. Treaties of the US, of course, override all conflicting state law and usually federal statutes (but not the Constitution). The WTO agreement is binding on the US unless the US withdraws from the WTO.

To: D. Long who wrote (2917)	4/9/1999 2:22:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17770

ANY law can be repealed at any time. If the U.S. (or more properly the state since these are mostly state lawsl) wanted to make drunk driving legal, they could do so any time. They could even pass a law that you HAD to have a blood alcohol level of .1 in order to drive. That doesn't mean they won't or can't jail people in the meantime for violating those laws. Sure, we COULD withdraw from our acceptance of the UN Charter. But UNTIL we do so, it still has the force of law.