From: bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker)
Subject: Re: REVERSING THE SCALES OF INJUSTICE: If Iraq Occupied the
Organization: Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, McMaster University
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 21:49:43 GMT

In article <C1DEMw.JwC@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Mason.L.Allen@dartmouth.edu (Mason L. Allen) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.024209.11223@mcshub.dcss.mcmaster.ca>
>bunker@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca (Alex Bunker) writes:
>
>> >hear of the Leauge of Nations, the Benelux treaties, or the Leauge of
>> >Augsburg (or, for that matter, the Justice Leauge America??)  What
>> [further boring blathering about Iraq mixed in with a little antisemitism]
>> 
>> I am curious again it seems obvious to me that if the US want the world
>> to be a more peaceful place and is truly interested in the strengthening
>> of international law and orders then what better way to set an example than
>> to abide by international law and follow ALL world court rulings
>> and conduct a foreign policy that NEVER breaks international law?
>> I think it would be a very good thing and It seems like the obvious thing 
>> for the US to do if it really is serious about being the "good guy" in 
>> international affairs. Following the golden rule of "do onto others as
>> you would have them do onto you seems to apply here. I really see this as
>> having nothing but positive rammifications. Leading by example is the most
>> noble way to lead of all. I know that in the past large nations have
>> subverted international organisations but what is wrong with progress
>> and striking out in a new direction? I think it would be a fine thing to 
>> write International law into US law making it impossible for future
>> US governments to EVER break international law.
>
>Once again, my point is that the US does not have to abide by any
>international law and it is not in its interest to do so. 
>International law as a rule is not controlled by set standards or 
>violations.  Its is a fieldwork of diplomacy - often, the Gen. Assembly
>of the UN will pass resolutions against all of the major western
>powers, which are ignored because nobody in the GA has the power to
>back them up.  The US simply takes care of its own interests - when it
>is convienant to help others, as in Somalia, for ex., it will.  
>Notice how everyone is complaining about the US going outside of the UN
>against Iraq recently.  Does anyone remember when Hussein held UN
>observors at gunpoint a few months back?  
>
>m.

But that is exactly what I do not like, this selfish attitude on behalf
of the US  what would be so bad about a USA with a foreign policy that
allways abides by international law whatever that law may be. I realise
that the general assembly passes resolutions against the major western
powers that can not be enforce I am not naive, I just think this
is a tragedy and it would be a brave bold historic and
pioneering thing for the western powers to do to not put their bloated
interests first and abide by international law WHETHER OR NOT IT IS IN
THEIR SHORT TERM INTERESTS. To consider international law as
a set standard and not violate it!
What is wrong with an end to the hypocracy?
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy