October 07, 2004

The "Global Test". Members of an international panel appointed by Kofi to study the United Nations' operations say the group hopes to lay down clear rules declaring when it is legal for a nation to use pre-emptive military force in its own defense

In an attempt to separate the topic from the current stand of the two major US political candidates even though the UN is doing it solely in response "from you know whom" , what are the Monkey's views on your country's soveriegnty and the proposed new rules? My FPP is aimed at pro/con UN I think this should be handled in a more of a Geneva Convention style-signatory way than the UN imposing rules on its members. I am no fan of a 'global test on preemption', but I think it should be my nation's choice to choose what rules of war are necessary (in a GC way) , even if they ultimately choose to follow the UN's Global Test to the letter.

posted by blogRot 20 years ago
  • but I think it should be my nation's choice to choose what rules of war are necessary (in a GC way) Even torture, POW treatment, etc?
  • Sorry for a slight derail, but I'll be glad if the UNSC adds newly formed nuclear powers as permanent members. By that I mean at least Pakistan and India, and possibly also Israel. And perhaps also add Japan. It's ridiculous that only China and Russia represent Asia among the permanent members, when the majority of international security issues are in the south and south-east. I also think the permanent members exercise too much power with their veto: they should have the same powers as the elected members, with their only privilege being their permanent nature.
  • Oops, I should add the middle-east to that list of problem areas, of course.
  • "In it's own defense." See, that was part of the whole problem. Iraq, well, it wasn't all that scary to begin with. We bombed them back into the stone age in 1991. Heck, right up untill the point that the US started to drop bombs, we were de facto allies. All of the scary sarin gas, the US gave it to em, and i'd be damned if we didn't blow it up back then. Well, lo and behold, according to the latests reports that is precisely what happened. Then you had all the hawks telling us that it would be a cakewalk. Easy. Back in six weeks. Iraq cannot both be a threat to our nation, as well as an incredibly easy place to invade, and successfully occupy. See, those are logically inconsistent positions. North Korea, and Iran on the other hand.....
  • shawnj, surely the Geneva Convention would still apply even if a country did choose its own rules. Who? The United States? Oh. Sorry.