![]() |
|
Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#5 |
whig
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,075
|
Slobodan Milosevic is am example of the victory putting the loser to trial, the fact it’s a matter for an international court is a side effect. America, Australia, France, Brittan, pretty much every major power either refuses to sign some major treaties or flouts.
Australia has a terrible record with treatment of aborigines and asylum seekers - often in breach of multiple treaties, the US refuses to sign an anti-landmine pact, France produces torture weapons, the list goes on and on and on. But it runs deeper than that, we will tolerate other countries breaking such agreements if it suits us, the US has favored trading partner with China, a flagrant abuser of human rights, for 25 years, until economics didn't matter, we tolerated the capture of East Timor by Indonesia, I think I’ve made my point As for Geneva convention in relation to camp X-Ray types - its in Americans national interest to obey that for the future - it comes under strategic national interest, my model stays. Cuban missile I honestly don't know enough about to comment but there are enough lines of communication between such superpowers that I’d say it wasn’t international treaties that saved the day. 1 Economic Security 2 Strategic Security 3 International Humanitarianism This is the National Interest model of a post-S11 world. *sighs* i should stop repeating bits of International Studies lectures here.
__________________
Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|