Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45

Thread: Nixing international treaties

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    13,535
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Quote Originally Posted by tude dog View Post
    Says you.
    That is something that you can check the veracity of it's not an opinion it's a fact. Do you watch fox news all the time or something? The fact that the US has a somewhat less than glorious past and has done many things especially in regard to it's indigenoue peoples that would not be tolerated nowadays is surely not a surprise to you. .

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kingston-upon-Thames
    Posts
    5,130
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    I wouldn't be surprised to find that many Americans rather pass on that one. I can't claim to know much, but what I have picked up is unremittingly grim. I suppose my question is can anyone tell me anything good about the treatment of Native American peoples? I don't think we're blameless, either: Didn't we sign a treaty with Pocahonta's lot and then just ignore it when inconvenient?

    I have to admit that although I've read a fair bit of history over the years I've never spent a lot of time on the Opium War...
    The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
    Lone voice: "I'm not."

  3. #33
    Premium Member tude dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    North Central Kansas
    Posts
    4,079
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    05:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Quote Originally Posted by gmc View Post
    That is something that you can check the veracity of it's not an opinion it's a fact.
    Say it again.

    Before there was the United States, there was Europe. You all got the ball rolling. You have no right to get all high and mighty. Read your own history.

    Forget broken treaties, often it was just straight out conquest.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmc View Post
    Do you watch fox news all the time or something? The fact that the US has a somewhat less than glorious past and has done many things especially in regard to it's indigenoue peoples that would not be tolerated nowadays is surely not a surprise to you. .
    What does all that have to do with the fact Iran accepted the signature of President Obama, not a binding treaty?
    “The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
    Gang aft agley.
    An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
    For promis'd joy!

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    13,535
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Quote Originally Posted by tude dog View Post
    Say it again.

    Before there was the United States, there was Europe. You all got the ball rolling. You have no right to get all high and mighty. Read your own history.

    Forget broken treaties, often it was just straight out conquest.



    What does all that have to do with the fact Iran accepted the signature of President Obama, not a binding treaty?
    Whose coming it high and mighty? We're quite well aware of our own history the difference is we don't pretend our colonial history was anything else but naked aggression and exploitation of weaker nations although youn will always getb those on the right who like to pretend otherwise just as they like to pretend the windrush scandal was oops a daisy a slight slip up rather than naked racism.

    Your comment "says you" in response to four part's comment rather implied you disagreed with the what he said and thought it a staement of opinion rather than fact.

    The Americans break their treaties with their own indiginous people, putting oil pipelines across their lands, supposedly protected by Treaty, and polluting their water supplies. If they can't honour the Treaties with its own people, why should anyone think they would honour them with other countries.
    If it was factually incorrect then correct it just pretending it's a matter of opinion is pointless and not really worthy of you.

    Why should anyone trust the word of a US president when the next one that comes along can just ignore what was agreed? Forby that why would any country ebter a trade agreement when one of the oarties will turn round and abrogate it in effect telling the other parties to suck it up?

    Look on the bright side at least you haven't had to put up with the never ending wedding enlightened only by the daily mail tying itself in knots trying not to complain about prince harry marrying a person of mixed race, bad enough she is american, or is it canadian they can hardly control the vitriol flag waving liars that they are.

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kingston-upon-Thames
    Posts
    5,130
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Before there was the United States, there was Europe. You all got the ball rolling. You have no right to get all high and mighty. Read your own history.
    The Opium War, the Amritsar Massacre, the Black and Tans...generally we acknowledge atrocities did happen and don't try to duck them. It's not a case of high and mighty, it's a case of looking at the whole picture. chuckle. And if you are talking about the time before Columbus they were your ancestors too - assuming you aren't pure Native American.

    I wonder if it might be something to do with the Wild West being a period of myth and legend for most Americans, viewed more like Arthur and the Round Table than, say, the British Empire is? Manifest Destiny is justification for conquest, pure and simple, it seems to me.

    And it is relevant it seems to me to question how far you can trust treaties with the US on the grounds that the Native Americans didn't do very well and signing anything with the President is only the first hurdle, though with the whole political establishment under Republican control maybe that doesn't apply here. It's especially relevant when we're looking at a trade deal. Personally I'd say anyone signing a deal with President Trump was insane or desperate but then that sums up right wing brexiters whose idea it is.
    The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
    Lone voice: "I'm not."

  6. #36
    Premium Member tude dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    North Central Kansas
    Posts
    4,079
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    05:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Quote Originally Posted by Clodhopper View Post
    The Opium War, the Amritsar Massacre, the Black and Tans...generally we acknowledge atrocities did happen and don't try to duck them. It's not a case of high and mighty, it's a case of looking at the whole picture. chuckle. And if you are talking about the time before Columbus they were your ancestors too - assuming you aren't pure Native American.

    I wonder if it might be something to do with the Wild West being a period of myth and legend for most Americans, viewed more like Arthur and the Round Table than, say, the British Empire is? Manifest Destiny is justification for conquest, pure and simple, it seems to me.
    Get over it. We have enough problems without rehashing past injustices.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clodhopper View Post
    And it is relevant it seems to me to question how far you can trust treaties with the US on the grounds that the Native Americans didn't do very well
    It started when we were still British.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clodhopper View Post
    and signing anything with the President is only the first hurdle,
    It was no secret that all US treaties must be approved by Congress, and everybody knows that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Clodhopper View Post
    though with the whole political establishment under Republican control maybe that doesn't apply here. It's especially relevant when we're looking at a trade deal. Personally I'd say anyone signing a deal with President Trump was insane or desperate but then that sums up right wing brexiters whose idea it is.
    “The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
    Gang aft agley.
    An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
    For promis'd joy!

  7. #37
    Premium Member tude dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    North Central Kansas
    Posts
    4,079
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    05:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Quote Originally Posted by gmc View Post
    Whose coming it high and mighty? We're quite well aware of our own history the difference is we don't pretend our colonial history was anything else but naked aggression and exploitation of weaker nations although youn will always getb those on the right who like to pretend otherwise just as they like to pretend the windrush scandal was oops a daisy a slight slip up rather than naked racism.

    Your comment "says you" in response to four part's comment rather implied you disagreed with the what he said and thought it a staement of opinion rather than fact.
    Bringing up old history irrelevant to the issue is my problem. I do owe Fourpart an apology for being such a flippant answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmc View Post
    If it was factually incorrect then correct it just pretending it's a matter of opinion is pointless and not really worthy of you.
    Quote Originally Posted by gmc View Post
    Why should anyone trust the word of a US president when the next one that comes along can just ignore what was agreed? Forby that why would any country ebter a trade agreement when one of the oarties will turn round and abrogate it in effect telling the other parties to suck it up?
    They all know what is going on. No secrets.

    Quote Originally Posted by gmc View Post
    Look on the bright side at least you haven't had to put up with the never ending wedding enlightened only by the daily mail tying itself in knots trying not to complain about prince harry marrying a person of mixed race, bad enough she is american, or is it canadian they can hardly control the vitriol flag waving liars that they are.
    Oh please, There is just so much on our news. My wife watched it all on TV.



    The only thing I found interesting is that the steering wheel is on the wrong side.
    “The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men,
    Gang aft agley.
    An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
    For promis'd joy!

  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    13,535
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    posted by tude dog
    They all know what is going on. No secrets.
    True but with a bullying US administration that seems to think other nations will just fall in to line what is more likely is that trade with other nations will become more important except for our pathetic sycophantic tory government we have just now who will be desperate tontake any deal going even if it leads to the destrution of our own food industry. One of the things americans object to is eu food labelling and food standards that stop us meat and agriculture products beung imprted - at least that's the way they see it.

    Oh please, There is just so much on our news. My wife watched it all on TV.

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kingston-upon-Thames
    Posts
    5,130
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Get over it. We have enough problems without rehashing past injustices.
    1) It isn't about justice or injustice at this point from a historical point of view, it's working out what REALLY happened, and how, and why.

    2) Past injustices (real or imagined) are often a big motivator for current behaviour. If you want to understand why a group or nation reacts to you in a particular way then knowing the relevant parts of their history does help. The Dutch used to get on pretty well with the Germans before the WWs. Not so much now. Past injustices...(that's at a personal level. At governmental level they get on fine).

    3) As far as I know, pretty much everywhere apart from the US if the Head of State signs an agreement that makes it legally binding. The deal is signed and that is that. It took a while for other nations to realise that the signature of the President means absolutely nothing except as a statement of personal preference.
    The crowd: "Yes! We are all individuals!"
    Lone voice: "I'm not."

  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    13,535
    Local Date
    02-26-2020
    Local Time
    11:30 AM

    Re: Nixing international treaties

    Register to remove this ad.
    Quote Originally Posted by tude dog View Post
    Get over it. We have enough problems without rehashing past injustices.



    It started when we were still British.



    It was no secret that all US treaties must be approved by Congress, and everybody knows that.
    I wonder if the native americans feel the injustice was in the past or is still something they are living with.

    Yes congress has to approve treaties does that mean the president can just abrogate them without their agreement? I'm talking about the free trade agreements I'm well aware the iran agreement wasn't actually ratified as a treaty although as an outsider the main objections to obama's agreement with iran seems to be principally on him being coloured rather than what he actually did. The alternative is war at some point.

    Trump is a ginger why no jokes about the ginger menace stalking the halls of democracy?

    As far as I know, pretty much everywhere apart from the US if the Head of State signs an agreement that makes it legally binding. The deal is signed and that is that. It took a while for other nations to realise that the signature of the President means absolutely nothing except as a statement of personal preference.
    No we're the same the prime minister cannot act without the agreement of parliament even if primus inter pares is a concept she finds difficult to grasp and seems to be determined to send to the dustbin of history.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts