On the United Nations and the USA's role in foreign policy.

[Strike For The South]

From the other thread

My goal is not to pollute the world nor hurt people however our main adversaries do not care about any of these treaties. Russia China Iran dont give a :flower: about whats on those pieces of paper. I know its en vouge to please the Europeans but I will not do so if it means falling behind these powers who I guarantee you will be much worse than us.

America should aspire to be better than everyone as well. So why should we hamstring ourselves?

[CrossLOPER]

What are you talking about, specifically?

[CountArach]

What are you talking about, specifically?

Quick run-down from the other thread:

Strike claims that the US should be solely Isolationist and should pull out of the UN and other world organisations. The government should only answer to the American people and put their interests ahead of everyone else.

[LittleGrizzly]

My goal is not to pollute the world nor hurt people however our main adversaries do not care about any of these treaties. Russia China Iran dont give a :flower: about whats on those pieces of paper.

And with that kind of attitude we will get nowhere, these kind of selfish foriegn powers are pained to do anything which isn't directly in thier favour but through constant badgering and negoations we have managed to get selfish powers to do things for the common good before, hell it looks like the USA is going to start paying attention to global warming whereas years ago when america walked out on the kyoto protocol is seemed like a distant dream...

Also these pieces of paper do make a difference, china russia and iran may want to just ignore these pieces of paper but by getting world agreement on these kind of things we make it so much harder for them to simply ignore these things, even though it is against thier interest it is also against thier interest to piss off the rest of world, so we actually use thier selfishness against them by making it in thier interest to follow these treaties

America being the most powerful country in the world means it has a huge international effect, if the usa simply decides to ignore a treaty then a host of other countrys around the world also think what is the point, if the usa simply decides treatys and world rules mean nothing then a host of other countrys see this as thier chance to also flout the rules, with the usa holding to these treatys then other countrys have to be worried about a telling off and haven't got the usa as an excuse for breaking these rules/treatys...

I have often wondered whether an isolationist USA would be a good thing or not, america has the power to project lots of good but also the power lots of bad onto the world, under bush there has been a negative effect imo, but i think under obama that will change and the usa will have a much more positive effect on the world.... starting with climate change..

I know its en vouge to please the Europeans but I will not do so if it means falling behind these powers who I guarantee you will be much worse than us.

The problem is if america keeps using worse nations who could become superpowers themselves as an excuse, theres a danger in the effort you will actually end up no better than them.... i have no doubts russia and chinas intentions are far from pure but im not sure what great catashrophe people think will happen once china takes over america as the world power, they have too many economic interests to suddenly start a world war or something...

[Incongruous]

Leave some of those fingers to point at another culprit of dishonesty and duplicity, now look in the mirror.

[Sarmatian]

I don't have the exact numbers, but I'm pretty sure that in the last decade or two US broke/ignored/disobeyed much more international treaties than either China, Russia or Iran.

[Strike For The South]

Leave some of those fingers to point at another culprit of dishonesty and duplicity, now look in the mirror.

I don't have the exact numbers, but I'm pretty sure that in the last decade or two US broke/ignored/disobeyed much more international treaties than either China, Russia or Iran.

I dont support Bush or his polices. Simply because I dont want America to spearhead many international affairs or adhere to the rest of the world does not mean I want America to have a blank check to do whatever we please.

[Incongruous]

I dont support Bush or his polices. Simply because I dont want America to spearhead many international affairs or adhere to the rest of the world does not mean I want America to have a blank check to do whatever we please.

Ha! I love this constant talk of Bush, as if the U.S.A was acceptable beforehand. The Democrats are just as bad, if not worse, than the Republicans. I see no change in America's constant interference in the affairs of other states until it goes bust. Which is probably not that far off now.

[Strike For The South]

Ha! I love this constant talk of Bush, as if the U.S.A was acceptable beforehand. The Democrats are just as bad, if not worse, than the Republicans. I see no change in America's constant interference in the affairs of other states until it goes bust. Which is probably not that far off now.

I agree.

[Koga No Goshi]

but I will not do so if it means falling behind these powers who I guarantee you will be much worse than us.

I don't think what our "enemies" are doing in terms of interrogation, human rights, pollution regulations or anything else should be our yardstick for our own country. Especially if you want us to be "the best."

That's the problem with your argument Strike.... you want the U.S. to be the best, but doing things like yanking out of proliferation and pollution treaties is counterproductive. The future is not in burning more coal and building a lot more nukes. The future is in new tech and sciences and alternative energy and education. If simply having the biggest stockpile of weapons and the most lucrative free market economy would alone make us the best then we've been the best for decades and are not being seriously challenged (yet), so I fail to see why pulling out of these treaties was necessary with that goal in mind.

[Strike For The South]

I don't think what our "enemies" are doing in terms of interrogation, human rights, pollution regulations or anything else should be our yardstick for our own country. Especially if you want us to be "the best."

That's the problem with your argument Strike.... you want the U.S. to be the best, but doing things like yanking out of proliferation and pollution treaties is counterproductive. The future is not in burning more coal and building a lot more nukes. The future is in new tech and sciences and alternative energy and education. If simply having the biggest stockpile of weapons and the most lucrative free market economy would alone make us the best then we've been the best for decades and are not being seriously challenged (yet), so I fail to see why pulling out of these treaties was necessary with that goal in mind.

Once agian Im not saying lowering our stockpile or cleaning our air are bad things. What I am saying is that we should do these things on our own terms.

[Koga No Goshi]

Once agian Im not saying lowering our stockpile or cleaning our air are bad things. What I am saying is that we should do these things on our own terms.

Every single nation shares the same sky, Strike. America cleaning up or reducing its air pollutants doesn't matter if India and China just pick up the slack and make up whatever we're cutting. That's the point of these useless treaties.

[Strike For The South]

Every single nation shares the same sky, Strike. America cleaning up or reducing its air pollutants doesn't matter if India and China just pick up the slack and make up whatever we're cutting. That's the point of these useless treaties.

China and Indias business is theres. Do you really honestly believe China holds true to these? Besides let the Euros force these countries to sign. America should be out of all this entanglement

[LittleGrizzly]

Besides let the Euros force these countries to sign. America should be out of all this entanglement

You think europe can convince these countries alone, as you said these countrys are nothing if self interested, the developed world needs a united front if there is any hope to convince them to go along with it, if america does its own thing china will see no reason to listen to the euro's and will do its own thing like america...

If on the other hand pressure is brought to bear on china from america, euro's and other developed countrys they will be convinced to agree to these treaties because it will be in thier self interest...

[Incongruous]

China and Indias business is theres. Do you really honestly believe China holds true to these? Besides let the Euros force these countries to sign. America should be out of all this entanglement

TBH, if the U.S.A did create for itself a truly great enviromentl plan, I would not care if it kept it to itself. It would be such a leap foreward.

[Koga No Goshi]

China and Indias business is theres. Do you really honestly believe China holds true to these? Besides let the Euros force these countries to sign. America should be out of all this entanglement

No it's not, not when a very high percentage of CA's air pollution is blown around the pacific rim, past Alaska, down into CA, and gets trapped there.

This is an international problem Strike. Thinking like early 20th century fiefdoms is over, and should stay over.

[Strike For The South]

Besides let the Euros force these countries to sign. America should be out of all this entanglement

You think europe can convince these countries alone, as you said these countrys are nothing if self interested, the developed world needs a united front if there is any hope to convince them to go along with it, if america does its own thing china will see no reason to listen to the euro's and will do its own thing like america...

If on the other hand pressure is brought to bear on china from america, euro's and other developed countrys they will be convinced to agree to these treaties because it will be in thier self interest...

China signs these things in name only. Not to mention I wouldn't mind pressuring China but we dont have to sign some fancy treaty to do that. America should control its own destiny.

[Strike For The South]

No it's not, not when a very high percentage of CA's air pollution is blown around the pacific rim, past Alaska, down into CA, and gets trapped there.

This is an international problem Strike. Thinking like early 20th century fiefdoms is over, and should stay over.

America (if it wants to) can take care of its own air problem. We have no right to force other countries to do the same.

[Koga No Goshi]

China signs these things in name only. Not to mention I wouldn't mind pressuring China but we dont have to sign some fancy treaty to do that. America should control its own destiny.

How is America deciding to, along with many other nations, decrease pollution, and then doing it... giving up control of its destiny?

Do you think Kyoto was "demanded" upon the U.S. by other nations?

[Strike For The South]

How is America deciding to, along with many other nations, decrease pollution, and then doing it... giving up control of its destiny?

Do you think Kyoto was "demanded" upon the U.S. by other nations?

No however signing these things only entangles us further. Look at the Georgia-Russia situation we end up looking like bumbling hypocrites. You are only looking at one issue. There is a larger idea behind this.

[LittleGrizzly]

It would just be pointless individual countries going thier own way, america could have some of the best enviromental policys in the world and china and india would wipe them out in no time, besides do you want them to have an economic advantadge or would you rather the world pressured them into agreeing to international treaties to give us a level playing field...

Not to mention I wouldn't mind pressuring China but we dont have to sign some fancy treaty to do that.

well its one of the best ways to do it, treaties contain obligations which are damaging to squirm out of, if these countries are as self interested as you say (they are) then simple verbal promises are definetly not enough, things need to be down on paper with the least possible wiggle room...

Edit:

Look at the Georgia-Russia situation we end up looking like bumbling hypocrites. You are only looking at one issue. There is a larger idea behind this.

The simple answer is to be consistently on the right side of the argument, if you hold yourself to a higher moral standing all these self serving powers look even worse in comparison...

[Koga No Goshi]

No however signing these things only entangles us further. Look at the Georgia-Russia situation we end up looking like bumbling hypocrites. You are only looking at one issue. There is a larger idea behind this.

In Georgia-Russia we were bumbling hypocrites because right after "going off on our own, screw the U.N." and invading a sovereign nation, we try to create huge outcry and a propaganda win out of it.

You kinda de-footed your argument there. :(

[Strike For The South]

It would just be pointless individual countries going thier own way, america could have some of the best enviromental policys in the world and china and india would wipe them out in no time, besides do you want them to have an economic advantadge or would you rather the world pressured them into agreeing to international treaties to give us a level playing field...

Not to mention I wouldn't mind pressuring China but we dont have to sign some fancy treaty to do that.

well its one of the best ways to do it, treaties contain obligations which are damaging to squirm out of, if these countries are as self interested as you say (they are) then simple verbal promises are definetly not enough, things need to be down on paper with the least possible wiggle room...

I dont think paper matter much either. Yall are harping on this one issue eventually China and India will come around and if they decide to do that great but we must look at the wider picture.

[Strike For The South]

In Georgia-Russia we were bumbling hypocrites because right after "going off on our own, screw the U.N." and invading a sovereign nation, we try to create huge outcry and a propaganda win out of it.

You kinda de-footed your argument there. :(

No it supports my argument. We shouldnt give the UN any sort of recognition because all it does is hamstring us.

[Koga No Goshi]

No it supports my argument. We shouldnt give the UN any sort of recognition because all it does is hamstring us.

From doing what?

[Strike For The South]

From doing what?

whats best for American citizens. Nothing specific but rather the fact that is a very entangling organization.

[Koga No Goshi]

whats best for American citizens. Nothing specific but rather the fact that is a very entangling organization.

I hear this general abstract sentiment from a lot of American "independentalists", with very little specific material as to how or what exactly we don't do in our own interests because we are pandering to the U.N. To be honest I can't think of any major policy decision we changed to please the U.N., we seem to do whatever the hell we like. When we don't do something that maybe we ought to, the U.N. is sometimes used as an excuse.

[Strike For The South]

I hear this general abstract sentiment from a lot of American "independentalists", with very little specific material as to how or what exactly we don't do in our own interests because we are pandering to the U.N. To be honest I can't think of any major policy decision we changed to please the U.N., we seem to do whatever the hell we like. When we don't do something that maybe we ought to, the U.N. is sometimes used as an excuse.

I cant think of anything off the top of my head but there are some of that I am sure. It is also the principle of the thing. The UN by very definition curbs US sovrigenty (no matter the ebb and flow of its power.)

[Koga No Goshi]

I cant think of anything off the top of my head but there are some of that I am sure. It is also the principle of the thing. The UN by very definition curbs US sovrigenty (no matter the ebb and flow of its power.)

If the U.N. serves as even the smallest, tiniest deterrant to a country deciding to just up and invade another without reason that would be generally understood as justified, I'd say it's a good thing.

I'm not saying it does that... I'm saying that if it "curbed sovereignty and total nation-level self-interest" in that way, I wouldn't see the problem.

[Strike For The South]

If the U.N. serves as even the smallest, tiniest deterrant to a country deciding to just up and invade another without reason that would be generally understood as justified, I'd say it's a good thing.

I'm not saying it does that... I'm saying that if it "curbed sovereignty and total nation-level self-interest" in that way, I wouldn't see the problem.

Well we obviously disagree. If we as US citizens saw the invasion as illegal and felt it was our duty to aid them then we would go in. I dont need some international organization telling me that.