Forums | MacLife
You are not logged in.
#51 2008-07-17 9:28 pm
- user
- Your plastic pal who's fun to be with
- From: I'm not getting you down, am I
- Registered: 2001-10-15
- Posts: 14540
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
A single bullet to the brain is cheap, too.
Aw, he's no fun, he fell right over.
Unless you become as little children, there's no way you will believe this crap.
Offline
#52 2008-07-17 9:55 pm
- Jdude
- Surfing on waterboarders
- From: Home is where the war is
- Registered: 2003-02-03
- Posts: 2158
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
you can't beat a tall cliff for economies of scale.
The problem I have with discussing freedom is that people have been conditioned to expect "of me to tell you what to do" to follow it... inevitably they notice I don't ever get to that part, and they feel like I am trying to trick them.
Sometimes before replying to a topic, I think to myself: I am just so original!
Offline
#53 2008-07-19 7:37 pm
- [MA] Flying_Meat
- Member
- From: Frisco?
- Registered: 2001-03-31
- Posts: 8355
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
radarman wrote:
ShnickyShnack wrote:
Why sign treaties, then enter them into US law, if obeying them is optional? I fail to see the point.
Better question - why are we signing these treaties? What did we get out of it, besides a warm fuzzy feeling?
it's not a better question at all. one reason is that you expect every other signing country to abide by the agreement. it's only integrity that prevents countries like the u.s. from signing, then ignoring the agreement. 
...and watch out for the flying meat!
Offline
#54 2008-07-21 11:27 am
- radarman
- Member
- Registered: 2005-02-28
- Posts: 2264
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
[MA] Flying_Meat wrote:
radarman wrote:
ShnickyShnack wrote:
Why sign treaties, then enter them into US law, if obeying them is optional? I fail to see the point.
Better question - why are we signing these treaties? What did we get out of it, besides a warm fuzzy feeling?
it's not a better question at all. one reason is that you expect every other signing country to abide by the agreement. it's only integrity that prevents countries like the u.s. from signing, then ignoring the agreement.
Any treaty signed should offer the US some benefit, or else it is a worthless treaty. Our government is supposed to look out for OUR interests first, and if they have any extra time, perhaps others interests.
Any treaty that puts our interests below another nations interests is a bad treaty, and should not be signed.
Also, all treaties should have a time frame. Circumstances change, and so should our alliances.
Offline
#55 2008-07-21 11:50 am
- jerwin
- Sophist
- Registered: 2003-01-01
- Posts: 5658
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
It seems a eminently fair and reasonable treaty to me. What's not to like?
Some subjects actually enjoy pain, and withhold information they might otherwise have divulged in order to be punished.
Central Intelligence Agency. (1983). Human Resource Exploitation Training Manual
Offline
#56 2008-07-21 12:38 pm
- user
- Your plastic pal who's fun to be with
- From: I'm not getting you down, am I
- Registered: 2001-10-15
- Posts: 14540
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
radarman wrote:
Any treaty signed should offer the US some benefit, or else it is a worthless treaty. Our government is supposed to look out for OUR interests first, and if they have any extra time, perhaps others interests.
Any treaty that puts our interests below another nations interests is a bad treaty, and should not be signed.
So, has that ever happened, or more to the point, has that happened in this case? Supposedly, the treaty was already vetted before we signed it. Heck, ol "throw the treaties under the bus" Bush has backed it.
What we have here is a State bucking the feds and the feds are letting them. Maybe that's why Bush was willing to back the treaty because he knew that would be the outcome.
Last edited by user (2008-07-21 12:38 pm)
Aw, he's no fun, he fell right over.
Unless you become as little children, there's no way you will believe this crap.
Offline
#57 2008-07-21 12:44 pm
- ShnickyShnack
- Commander of Insurgent Cell "Dreamboat"
- From: Amidst a superiority complex
- Registered: 2001-05-25
- Posts: 40261
Re: "World Court" to render judgement on US executions?
radarman wrote:
[MA] Flying_Meat wrote:
radarman wrote:
Better question - why are we signing these treaties? What did we get out of it, besides a warm fuzzy feeling?it's not a better question at all. one reason is that you expect every other signing country to abide by the agreement. it's only integrity that prevents countries like the u.s. from signing, then ignoring the agreement.
Any treaty signed should offer the US some benefit, or else it is a worthless treaty. Our government is supposed to look out for OUR interests first, and if they have any extra time, perhaps others interests.
Any treaty that puts our interests below another nations interests is a bad treaty, and should not be signed.
Also, all treaties should have a time frame. Circumstances change, and so should our alliances.
Wow, this is a sweet flashback to the days when America was rich enough to do whatever the smurf it wanted.
I feel so ... nostalgic.
"Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself especially, are in a state of shocked disbelief." -- Alan Greenspan
Online
